Geithner: Higher Taxes Hurt Economic Growth

March 12, 2009 RSS Feed Print

Here is an illuminating exchange today between Sen. Mike Crapo and Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner:

SEN. MIKE CRAPO, R-Idaho: “You say that the tax increases will only happen when the economy has recovered. I understand that a lot of economists are saying we are going to be recovered by 2011. Frankly I think there are economists who are saying maybe our recovery will not be so strong by then. My question to you is, are these tax increases contingent on a recovery or are they going to happen regardless of what happens in 2011?”

SEC. GEITHNER: “Senator, I think it is a very important question. I think, again, we need to lay out an ambitious path for bringing those deficits down, commit to achieving that with a mix of measures on the resource side and the spending side to do the best possible job of leaving our economy stronger, and that’s what the President’s budget tries to do. Now of course we are going to have to watch how the economy evolves and I want to underscore that one of the mistakes governments have made over time in dealing with economic crises is putting the brakes on too quickly or in ways that hurt growth just as it’s starting to take hold. We just want to be careful not to do that.”

Me:  By that standard, it might be time for a White House "no new taxes" pledge until the economy grows at least 3.5 percent or more in back-to-back years. Team Obama thinks we will do that in 2010 and 2011. But that bullish forecast is a real outlier.

 

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

So, if I understand you, you:

1) want to raise revenue...isn't revenue what businesses generate from producing/selling things? What does the government produce/sell that can grow the economy? Instead, it is just a vaccuum that sucks money from the economy.

2) curb excesses...OK, many examples of the Nardellis who are paid a lot of money to leave a job in which they were not effective in delivering on shareholder value (their primary responsibility). Are their enough of these people to make a difference related to "revenue"? Assuming no, then what would be the purpose? To demonstrate the power of the government to punish those with whom it does not agree? I know it's a very 90's liberal phrase-of-the-day, but that would seem to impact and have a very "chilling effect" on people.

3) Prove to the world that we are willing to tax our own citizens into submission(?). Where in history has that ever brought growth and new opportunity? Besides, I think our foreign creditors got the true picture when Mrs Clinton went to China and begged them to keep buying our debt.

What I find very concerning is Geithner's use of the term "resource side"...I am the resource side, I work darn hard for those resources and I would prefer to use my own resources to help grow the economy rather than having them wasted by the government.

Deep in the heart of of TX 3:59PM March 12, 2009

but you did not address anything real, or anything I actually said in first post.

Muser of NM 2:43PM March 12, 2009

First off the higher end doesn't have enough money fix the economy.

Second the class warfare has to stop. Without the "higher end" there would be no jobs. Who do you think is starting the companies and buying the goods that are produced? It’s not the poor.

&

Third, we do not need to demonstrate anything to the world. We need to do what is in the best interest of America.

I love you leftwing libs that put so much faith in the federal and state governments. Have you ever taken the time to look into the background of the people that are "representing" you? If you did you never trust most of them with one cent of your money, let alone trillions.

Thinking that other people or the government "OWES" you anything is a joke. Get off your azz and work for your dreams and stop asking for money from the hard working people of America.

Larry of CA 2:37PM March 12, 2009

Capital Commerce

Capital Commerce

U.S. News business reporter Matthew Bandyk examines the issues, people, and debates that shape the nexus of political and economic life in the nation's capital.

advertisement

advertisement