Kiss of Death

Ever since George H.W. Bush reneged on his "read my lips" pledge, any politician has faced the kiss of death (a lost election) if suggesting even remotely that he/she might raise taxes. At last night's Democratic debate both candidates tightrope walked the issue, while John McCain has adopted the post Bush Sr. Republican battle cry of "no new taxes."

Everybody seems to forget that both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton raised taxes during their terms leading to periods of strong economic growth and in Clinton's case even a budget surplus. And of course, McCain was an early opponent of Bush Jr's tax cuts. Now despite our multi-trillion dollar national debt, candidate McCain even suggests suspending the gas tax over the summer, while the Highway Trust Fund, which the gas tax supports, tracks toward insolvency next year.

I have news for all the candidates. U.S. taxpayers will be paying more over the next decade -- whether in the form of income taxes, sales taxes, federal taxes, local taxes, property taxes or various forms of user fees. We all want the big-ticket expenses: health care, social security, defense, police and fire protection, border security, infrastructure, and good schools. We need to pay off all the debt we've built up on the Iraq War and we aren't turning back the stimulus checks we are about to get in tax rebates. The bills eventually come due. We can't have all the things we really want out of government and not pay for them. That just doesn't work.

So get ready to pay more for your government. The next President will have no choice, but to raise taxes. Governors and mayors will need to do the same. Or would you prefer fewer garbage collections, reduced police patrols, and less of  everything else you want or have come to expect?

 

Comments

[Deal Junkie]

Wasn't there a recent analysis done on the cost of the Iraq war, which concluded that each 4-person family in America owed $16,000 in taxes just for the Iraq war?

[What about Waste?]

By making your argument for higher taxes, you seem to imply that there is no waste to be cut from government. True, we can't "have all the things we really want out of government and not pay for them", but anyone that has worked with a government entity knows about the waste (time, money) that is involved. Is it not possible that lowering taxes and forcing government to examine it's wasteful ways is a good thing? And what has happened to all the money the skyrocketing home valuations have brought in over the last few years? In infill locations across America new McMansions were built on existing home sites, values shot up, new revenue was brought in. Yet all you hear is how the cities are still running on low funds. What'd they do with all the money? My roads weren't fixed. My schools weren't improved. Where did it go? So yes, you're right, sometimes you have to pay the piper, let's just not forget the piper is typically lazy and motivated only to save his/her own job not improve the system.