[mobile site, backup mobile]
[SoapBlox Help]
Menu & About Calitics

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?

- About Calitics
- The Rules (Legal Stuff)
- Event Calendar
- Calitics' ActBlue Page
- Calitics RSS Feed
- Additional Advertisers


View All Calitics Tags Or Search with Google:
 
Web Calitics

Fiorina: Deficits Only Matter When You're Trying To Screw Working People

by: Robert Cruickshank

Mon Jul 12, 2010 at 13:18:58 PM PDT


The new Republican talking point of the day appears to be that tax cuts for the rich are exempt from the deficit. Perhaps it's the chart at the right that has them all aroused. Knowing that Bush's tax cuts are to expire at the end of this year, and knowing that their own deficit scare rhetoric has put those tax cuts on the chopping block, they're pulling out all the stops to save those tax cuts for the rich from expiration. Arizona Senator Jon Kyl is leading the charge, saying the cuts should be extended even if it hurts the deficit.

Now Carly Fiorina is joining the cause. In an interview with KCBS's Doug Sovern and CBS 5's Simon Perez today, she said that "you don't need to pay for tax cuts."

Fiorina: Let me propose something that may seem crazy to you: you don't need to pay for tax cuts. They pay for themselves, if they are targeted, because they create jobs....We're getting ready to increase the taxes on capital formation. That's a really bad idea in the middle of a recession. Why are we making it harder for people to invest capital? We should be making it easier!

This is the Laffer curve coming back to the fore: what Bush I rightly called "voodoo economics." Fiorina claimed Reagan proved this works, but that conveniently ignores the actual impact of the Bush tax cuts. George W. Bush saw nearly 3 million jobs lost during his time in office.

Further, his tax cuts went to the wealthy, who used it to invest in job creation...overseas. To people like one Carly Fiorina, then CEO of HP, who fired tens of thousands of workers at HP and called offshoring "right-sourcing." The notion that tax cuts pay for themselves and create American jobs is absurd. But note that in her spiel, Fiorina didn't say "American jobs" - she clearly expects business to use further capital gains cuts to invest in jobs overseas, while continuing to screw workers here at home.

Fiorina also criticized Boxer for not bringing enough money back to California. But this is a nonsensical criticism, given that Fiorina opposed the stimulus and other federal funding priorities. In the interview, in fact, she said it "failed," despite the proven success of job creation and stabilization of the unemployment rate.

She also said the US Senate "doesn't have enough people who understand how the economy works," which is certainly a true statement given the Senate's desire for austerity - but Fiorina herself also shows she doesn't understand how the economy works by calling for cutting the federal spending necessary to provide economic recovery.

Listening to the entire interview, it is clear that Fiorina is running for office with the express intent of doing whatever large corporations and the rich want, regardless of how it affects everyone else.

Like Jon Kyl, she only cares about the deficit when it is a justification for slashing benefits for working people. When it comes to tax cuts, however, the sky's the limit when it comes to growing the deficit to hand wheelbarrows full of money over to rich people like herself.

UPDATE: Guess where we've heard the "tax cuts create jobs" argument before? That's right, from Bush's own economic advisers, serving a president who ultimately delivered the worst job creation record by a president in 75 years. Bush's tax cuts failed at their stated purpose, but succeeded at their real purpose, to transfer wealth to the wealthy while screwing everyone else.

Robert Cruickshank :: Fiorina: Deficits Only Matter When You're Trying To Screw Working People
Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

is it just me (4.00 / 1)
Or are their arguments getting increasingly ridiculous?

I'm the project director and statewide organizer for California VoterConnect.

Increasingly ridiculous (0.00 / 0)
   and increasingly predictable...

[ Parent ]
Here is a good way to explain it (0.00 / 0)
If, say, you were running a large company, say a computer maker like HP, would it be wise to borrow money so that you could lower the price on every PC by $100 for the next year?

I mean, you could argue that by doing so that people would buy more PCs.

Most of us would say no. It's not sustainable. But that's what tax cuts are.

What DOES make sense is to borrow to buy equipment that would lower your cost indefinitely, or to borrow to hire more workers to expand capacity.  

Fry, don't be a hero! It's not covered by our health plan!


Calitics in the Media
Archives & Bookings
The Calitics Radio Show
Calitics Premium Ads


Support Calitics:

Advertisers


Referrals
Technorati
Google Blogsearch

Daily Email Summary


Powered by: SoapBlox