Thune Statement on President Obama’s Budget
WASHINGTON, D.C.—U.S. Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) made the following comment on the president’s fiscal year 2016 budget proposal:
“While the president continues to cling to the same old failed top-down economic policies of spending increases and tax hikes, Republicans are focused on the future. Our budget will focus on growing the economy from the ground-up. Unlike the president’s budget, ours will balance and will reduce runaway spending and waste to make a more efficient, effective, and accountable federal government.”
###
What will you do? How will you do it?
A tax holiday on the repatriation of foreign profits would be very beneficial. The holiday Bush gave generated huge economic returns. Increasing the amount companies can deduct on R&D is another huge economic driver. Getting rid of the estate tax on estates over $5 million is yet another huge boon for our economy, followed in tandem with a federal ban of the ‘rules against perpetuities’. Dodd/Frank needs to be abolished, along with a complete repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. All these two pieces of legislation due is hamper investment growth. Pass Keystone XL. Reduce the capital gains tax to 5% in order to encourage American investment growth. Reduce the corporate tax rate to bring American jobs back home. These are all solid plans to stimulate the growth of investment in the United States and to enhance the prosperity of the job creators.
Wait a minute! Are you suggesting that we lower taxes to increase revenue and let the American people drive the economy? That’s just crazy talk, Anon.. Everybody knows that the government should take all the money generated by the work of the American people (those who actually do work) and then divide it as the ruling class sees fit. That is the true way to prosperity.
Forgot that Clinton got rid of Glass, but Dodd Frank is totallt awful!
Is this a press release or a 144 character twitter comment?
“… old failed top-down economic policies of spending increases and tax hikes”
You must be talking about Keynesian (not Kenya) economics. Guess what? It works. It saved capitalism in the 1930s. It gave us the longest running economic expansion in the 1990s, and it just pulled us from the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression.
“Republicans are focused on the future.”
No you are not, you guys are still debating Obamacare five years later and three years after the SCOTUS decision.
“Our budget will focus on growing the economy from the ground-up. Unlike the president’s budget, ours will balance and will reduce runaway spending and waste to make a more efficient, effective, and accountable federal government.”
If you seriously tried to balance the budget right now without tax increases (I am confident you wouldn’t advocate that one) you will only take money out of the economy and further burden the middle class with another economic slow-down.
If you want to get a car going again or have it move faster you give it some gas or pour some on the carburetor, but you don’t take gas out of the tank to cause this effect. Supply-side economics, the one you advocate, takes gas out of the tank, Keynesian economics gives it some gas….
the only reason that the fantasy of workable keynsian economics persists is because they always pull the plug on keynes when people have had enough and reinstitute a vibrant friedman style model over time. there are equally valid arguments that the ideas of keynes and company made the great depression much longer and deeper than it needed to be.
the gas tank is a horrible analogy. the usage of gas by an internal combustion engine is a closed-cycle system where the gas is depleted. the infusion and multiple turnover of cash in an economy is more like water given to a plant. ideally, the earth’s water cycle is a better illustration of friedman style economics, where the keynsians are like the ranchers who build a dam upstream to starve out the sheep farmers in the valley.
btw, tax increases ARE what take money out of the general economy
The debate on Obamacare has nothing to do with the legality of the ACA, it has everything to do with the effectiveness. Who is better off with the ACA in place? Is it truly providing what was promised?
Here’s what it should read: “While the president continues to cling to the same old failed top-down economic policies of spending increases and tax hikes, I have $10 million in my campaign warchest. Now where are the cameras? I feel a photo op coming on!”
What is a warchest? Is it big enough to hold $10 million dollars in cash?
why should it read that? thune’s not that much of a headline hog, really.