PDA

View Full Version : Conservative Magazine Turns on Mr Bush


Spence
11-06-2003, 08:17 PM
Most of you have probably heard of The Economist. For those who have not, it's one of the oldest magazines in the world. It's published in the United Kingdom, but most of its readers are in the United States. It's conservative. It supported the war in Vietnam, Ronald Reagan and even endorsed George W Bush in 2000. It does not look as if The Economist will be making that mistake again. Behold: A poll by ABC News and the Washington Post, published on November 2nd, showed that 53% of respondents disapproved of Mr Bush's tax policy. The large cast of Democratic presidential hopefuls claim Mr Bush's tax cuts have been a giveaway to the rich, wrecking the economy and mortgaging the future for America's children.

More sober analysts are also worried. In their most recent poll, members of the National Association of Business Economists described the federal deficit as the biggest problem facing America's economy. A bipartisan coalition of three economic think-tanks—the Committee for Economic Development, the Concord Coalition and the Centre on Budget and Policy Priorities—recently declared that, without a change in course, the next decade might be the “most fiscally irresponsible” in the country's history.
...
Look closely, and Mr Bush is also much less of a tax reformer than Mr Reagan was. In 1986, the Gipper presided over the biggest tax reform in modern American history. The tax base was broadened and rates were lowered, but the overall tax burden remained unchanged. Although Team Bush wants a reformed tax code, aimed at consumption rather than income, their strategy of tax reform via tax cuts will not produce a clean reform. Many of the subsidies and loopholes of the current system will remain. The result will be a narrower tax base, full of distortions, which shifts the burden of taxation towards poorer Americans.

The other big difference with the Gipper is that Mr Reagan was not averse to putting up taxes when too much red ink appeared. Taxes were raised several times during his presidency. Congressional rules on deficit reduction were introduced during Mr Reagan's second term. So far, at least, Team Bush has shown no such flexibility. There is no admission that America faces a fiscal mess, and no shifting from the mantra that all tax increases, at all times, are bad.
...
Long after Dubya is back on his ranch, Americans will be trying to recover from the mess he created. Those are the highlights. If you'd like more, read it all. (http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2189237)

Ford
11-06-2003, 08:25 PM
My family gets the Economist and while it's certainly not liberal, I don't think it's as conservative as advertised in your post. I consider it a fairly objective, quality journalism publication.

RedskinsDave
11-06-2003, 08:33 PM
Not to help Spence but he's right about the magazine. See this and note the name of the store:

http://www.conservativebookstore.com/magrack/frontpage.htm

It's not a rag and is very well done but it certainly leans right.

Spence
11-06-2003, 08:40 PM
Yeah, it's definitely a conservative magazine. I subscribed to it for years. It's conservative, but not loopy. Mainstream conservative, in the sense that it favors free trade [a big reason they endorsed Bush in 2000 and they were really annoyed when he abandoned free trade] and balanced budgets.

This really is not that surprising. Although the party leaders march lockstep behind Bush all the way [off the cliff] I talk to mainstream Republicans all the time who are disgusted by Mr Bush's deficits. Balanced budgets used to be a major theme of the Republican party. And not that long ago either. Some conservatives are not so happy to have busted the budget and handed the deficit issue to the Democrats.

RedskinsDave
11-06-2003, 09:17 PM
I'm a mainstream Republican who wasn't sold on the tax cuts, more for the timing than the intention. In another situation where we weren't increasing the size of the government (the only time I have ever been okay with it) it could work.

Also, why in God's name are those poor fools fraternizing with the enemy?

Spence
11-06-2003, 10:39 PM
As the article noted, even Reagan raised taxes several times when he saw it was necessary.

Dave, I'm not their enemy. At least not professionally. In my work I am strictly non-partisan. I'm paid for my expertise in certain areas, not my political views. Unfortunately, I have not yet found anyone who wants to pay me to rant about political outrages, which is why I have to punish you poor souls with it instead. :D

Skinzaholic
11-07-2003, 08:00 AM
Spence... I plan on snding you a bill for my reading time since I have listen to your political rhetoric for quite some time now! should atleast be able to take a mini-vacation or something with the proceeds.

LOL!

RedskinsDave
11-07-2003, 08:07 AM
I'm with you Spence. I keep checking monster.com and hotjobs for that listing of an "internet chat politico" or "internet chat sports junkie".

Back to the topic...You know even if Bush had raised taxes and said it was to cut the deficit and support the war on terror that the dems would've cried that he was gouging the poor working man.

higgybaby
11-07-2003, 09:02 AM
I think that stories based on polls are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine

Spence
11-07-2003, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by RedskinsDave
Back to the topic...You know even if Bush had raised taxes and said it was to cut the deficit and support the war on terror that the dems would've cried that he was gouging the poor working man. That depends on who was paying more taxes. If he raises taxes on the middle class and the working poor [as he has] then of course the Dems would cry foul. If he raised taxes on people like me, though, I would not complain. Unless he was spending that money to invade more countries that had nothing to do with 9/11/01.

Spence
11-07-2003, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by higgybaby
I think that stories based on polls are about as useful as a screen door on a submarine Read the entire story, Higgy. It's not based on a poll.