We’ve opened all our presents, spent time with family, and enjoyed some tasty food.
Notwithstanding all this good cheer, there’s a a cloud of doom on the horizon. And that horizon is Washington, DC, America’s work-free drug city.
It appears that there’s no way of avoiding a tax increase. Either we go over the cliff, meaning across-the-board hikes for those who pay federal income tax, or Republicans acquiesce to Obama’s class-warfare tax agenda.
No wonder Santa left one unwanted present.
I explain the grim outlook for Fox Business News, though my display of sartorial Christmas splendor somewhat offsets the dour topic.
In the interview, I don’t say what should happen, though I’ve previously argued that it’s better to go over the cliff rather than give Obama a victory that will set the stage for further defeats over the next two years.
Better to have a bigger tax hike now, in other words, than to create a precedent that will lead to even larger losses in 2013 and 2014.
Besides, it’s quite possible that Obama is bluffing and this is the right way to get all the tax cuts extended.
But I admit there’s lots of guessing and speculation in those sentences.
There is one thing, however, that I can say with complete confidence. We don’t need a tax increase to balance the budget. We can get rid of red ink in just 10 years simply restraining spending so that it grows by only 2.5 percent per year.
P.S. Notwithstanding the last sentence, our main fiscal goal should be smaller government, not a balanced budget.
P.P.S. I was glad to have an opportunity in the interview to defend Robin Hood’s reputation. As I’ve explained, he was a Tea Party guy, helping to reclaim and return money that was taken by the tax collectors of Prince John and the Sheriff of Nottingham. Here’s another Ken Catalino cartoon that sort of makes this point.
I’ve also had to correct Cal Thomas on Robin Hood’s philosophical bona fides, so this is a very common mistake.
P.P.P.S. This is my second attempt at creating a video in the absence of the Cato expert. There’s a hiccup around the 2:25 mark, but I think the picture quality is much better than my first effort.
P.P.P.P.S. If you like the red jacket, previous attempts to be on the cutting edge of fashion can be seen here and here.
[…] what it’s worth, I also tried to correct the record about Robin Hood in a TV interview back in […]
[…] what it’s worth, I also tried to correct the record about Robin Hood in a TV interview back in […]
[…] Here’s another Ken Catalino cartoon that I like, even though it perpetuates an inaccurate portrayal of Robin Hood as a […]
[…] be fair, sometimes Republicans are placed in a no-win situation. During the “fiscal cliff” discussions last year, Obama held the upper hand since he […]
[…] You’ll notice that the video in this post has good quality, unlike the fuzzy resolution and discontinuous footage in clips I’ve recently shared. That’s because Cato’s expert on such things is back in the […]
[…] You’ll notice that the video in this post has good quality, unlike the fuzzy resolution and discontinuous footage in clips I’ve recently shared. That’s because Cato’s expert on such things is back in the […]
[…] seems as though my prediction about the outcome was correct. Not that this makes me […]
[…] Here’s another Ken Catalino cartoon that I like, even though it perpetuates an inaccurate portrayal of Robin Hood as a […]
[…] Here’s another Ken Catalino cartoon that I like, even though it perpetuates an inaccurate portrayal of Robin Hood as a […]
[…] You’ll notice that the video in this post has good quality, unlike the fuzzy resolution and discontinuous footage in clips I’ve recently shared. That’s because Cato’s expert on such things is […]
This wasn’t a cave-in. More than half the people whose taxes were going to go up won’t have their taxes go up. That’s why the Democratic Left is having conniptions today. I thought Tom Harkin was going to have a stroke there on the Senate floor, he was so angry that he wasn’t going to be able to get his hand into the pockets of small business.
The official Republican position was that the proposed increase would raise taxes on small businessmen. Well, almost all small businessmen are now free of that increase.
The capital gains rate went up, but not very much; our economy has prospered with the capital gains rate at that level before. The dividend tax rate went back up to what it had been. If you’re unhappy about that, how about doing a better job of explaining to the people what double taxation is? People favor an increase in that rate because it looks to them like a preferred rate that is enjoyed mostly by wealthy people, only in nominal amounts by the rest of us. (I think that increase represents an increase in my taxes of about $50.) They’re also skeptical about money already having been taxed to the corporation when so many corporations wind up paying zero taxes.
There are also an awful lot of Republicans tired of throwing themselves on their swords for rich people who then vote Democratic. If the rich don’t care whether their tax rate goes up, why should we?
[…] seems as though my prediction about the outcome was correct. Not that this makes me […]
[…] seems as though my prediction about the outcome was correct. Not that this makes me […]
[…] seems as though my prediction about the outcome was correct. Not that this makes me […]
[…] seems as though my prediction about the outcome was correct. Not that this makes me […]
[…] a pretty good summary of the debate. Or perhaps I should say bad summary. No wonder I’ve been wearing my red jacket to cheer myself […]
[…] There’s No Good Outcome to the Fiscal Cliff Fight […]
Totally agree
I too say go over the cliff than to cave in to Obama!!