Once a socialist always a socialist.
As for Ryan not right one: business investment - the question is how to create jobs and usually that takes investment. According to Laffer (and he is conveniently ignored), those who invest want a return on that investment. When taxes are too high (and the government feels the rich have to pay for all the Democratic spending and wealth transfers), then those who can invest don't. That would appear to support Ryan's view.
As for Ryan not right two: crowding out - unless one turns all new off, there is more and more talk of the bond bubble being built up by the Federal Reserve. And, when rates do move up, it can be very fast and devastating. One only needs look at what has happened in South Europe.
As for Ryan not right three: consumers should be saving - it is clear that if one is middle class or lower middle class, your income is likely down (at least in real terms); likewise, the government is doing more and more transfers (see the numbers of people on food stamps) and Obamacare promises to provide healthcare for free. So, why save?
The article also omits for some reason the evidence on the share of GDP taken by government. In the 1970's, when it was more than 19%, the economy stagnated (the old "stagnation"); when it dropped to 19% in the 1980's, the economy grew.
Right now, the number is 22% plus and Democrats would prefer 25%. So, why wonder about where employment is going. Until the share of GDP left to individuals and the private sector drops, there is historical evidence of why there aren't jobs. (Recent articles on California further validate the empirical evidence that high taxes and regulations drive away jobs - and, we are talking about the factories that provide low and middle income jobs in the case of California!)
No comments:
Post a Comment