Crazy Jane and the Budget Doom Patrol
September 25, 2003
Economic Crazy Janes are running wild. When Grant Morrison conceived of the Doom Patrol’s Crazy Jane, I wonder if he ever dreamt that all 64 of her personas would coalesce into the budget police, "Oh, I'm so horny. I'm so horny all the time. You know what my Daddy said? Daddy said I was a little slut and when I grew up, I'd do it for money. And you know what? He was right. Except I don't even want money. I just want to do it."
And from the ink of the New York Times to the cables of CNN, the U.S. is being terrorized by a "Bush Economy" Kristallnacht. Liberals and conservatives alike have joined the pogrom to obliterate any economic truth, "Record Deficit", "All Time Record Deficit", "Worst Economy in History", "Highest Unemployment in Decades", and Blah, Blah, Blah.... Just look at the headlines.
Ask an authority like Crazy Jane #1...I mean presidential wannabe John Kerry, "It's obvious this administration doesn't have the slightest clue about how to get this economy back on track, get Americans back to work and get our nation's finances under control...it is time to admit what millions of unemployed Americans already know -- that the economic policies of George W. Bush are the worst in our nation's history." Of course Kerry understands "how to get an economy back on track"...just marry an heiress.
With unemployment down to 6.1% from its recent high of 6.4% there is a real disaster brewing. We are near the "natural rate of unemployment". From the University Of Chicago School Of Economics, "The best a nation can do is settle for the lowest level of unemployment that will not begin accelerating inflation. (Milton) Friedman called this point the "natural rate of unemployment...in the U.S. today, economists estimate it to be slightly less than 6 percent." But I guess the budget police of the Doom Patrol know more about this than the recipient of the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize for economic science. Maybe Kerry just misses Clinton’s 1993 unemployment rate of 6.9%...what an odd number...oh yeah, that was a few years before Monica became gainfully employed.
And about the "record" budget deficit, Joe Lieberman (Crazy Jane #2) yelps, "The tide of red ink is rising higher than ever before." To this, the New York Times editorial board (Crazy Jane # 3 through 10) adds, "The country is facing the largest budget deficit in history, and there is no realistic plan for getting it under control." Oh baby, let’s just keep doing it.
These statements could be true and they could be false. In aggregate terms, a budget deficit of $450 to $500 billion is the largest in U.S. history. BUT...as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, this deficit is mediocre at best (4.3% of GDP). In percentage terms, Clinton had a larger deficit in 1993 (4.6%). The U.S. now has an almost $11 trillion dollar economy. Think of it this way; a $200,000 home mortgage was immense when a family’s income was $5000 per year. But when that income reached $100,000 per year, the $200,000 mortgage was just average.
If the Crazy Janes want to stick by their version of the story and use only aggregate numbers, then by default they have to also admit that: Americans are making more money than ever before; the poor are receiving more benefits than ever before; the members of Congress are taking the biggest paychecks in U.S. history; and the taxpayer is being soaked for the greatest aggregate dollar amount in the history of the world. Looking at it this way, maybe the Crazy Janes don’t like "apples to oranges" lying.
Always saving the best for last, let’s look at matchbook-cover economist Paul Krugman (Crazy Jane #11 through 64), "Very few Americans pay as much as 50 percent of their income in taxes; on average, families near the middle of the income distribution pay only about half that percentage in federal, state and local taxes combined. In fact, though most Americans feel that they pay too much in taxes, they get off quite lightly...Furthermore, for most Americans tax rates probably haven't risen for a generation. And a few Americans -- namely those with high incomes -- face much lower taxes than they did a generation ago." Old "Apples to Oranges" Krugman is either a lying propagandist or an idiot...either way, his methodology is flawed.
Krugman must assume that most readers of the NYT’s are stupid. What does he mean by "families near the middle of the income distribution"? Why doesn’t he either say mean or median? Geez...well, it really doesn’t matter. Families in the "middle" are a husband and wife (hopefully) with a combined income of about $50,000 per year or a single person with a $25,000 annual income. They are both taxed at the same rate. And...people at or below this income level pay less than 4% of the total income taxes. Additionally, 19 million of these people are receiving over $32 billion in Earned Income Credits (fancy welfare).
So Krugman is saying that people who pay no taxes aren’t being taxed heavily. And the people who pay the taxes are paying less than they did a generation ago. Yet more dollars are being paid in taxes. Oh, Krugman is not talking about the number of dollars you pay in taxes; he’s talking about the percentage of your income that you pay. My my...how when it comes to the deficit, Crazy Jane talks in aggregate dollars but when it comes to taxation, she suddenly, and without warning, converts to percentages. Crazy Jane Krugman must be trying to "do it" to G.W.
The bottom line with taxation is simple. Are you paying more dollars now than you did yesterday? And 99% of the time, the answer is yes.
There is no "record" deficit; there is no "record" unemployment; and you certainly are still paying too much in taxes. The Janes have gone Crazy because they fear: that tax cuts might make Congress put the brakes on spending increases; that being honest about deficits might get G.W. re-elected; and that you may get to keep more of your income. Maybe Crazy Jane should just be happy "doing it" to herself!
RightPage