I very much like this Will Wilkinson post. He tees off from this reader comment on another blog:
Politician A: Mr. Joe Sixpack, we can maximize government revenue by raising taxes by 10%, because you see, we’ll only lose 9% to slower growth, so our revenue actually increases! Then we can spend it in lots of ways to make you happy!
Joe Sixpack: So, you’re raising taxes by 10% and you’re going to slow the economy?
Poltician A: Don’t look so glum! It’s for the children!
Politician B: Me cut taxes. You keep money, economy grow fast. Ugh. Me like cookie.
Joe Sixpack: I pick B.
Update: From a reader:
Hi Jonah. Always appreciate your good humor. The much larger problem, long term, is that in contemporary America, tax increases will never be allocated proportionately (and I’m open to discussion about to the exact definition of “proportionate”) across the entire population. The constant promises to “tax the rich” send the message (ultimately false) that government can provide goodies to you, at no cost to you, by taking from someone else. In a society that aspires to be free and democratically governed, the prospect that the government can plunder some for the benefit of others reduces the impetus for most voters to consider tradeoffs–the government providing this benefit or service vs. that one, the cost of payment (tax) versus the benefit of a new service. In almost all economic transactions, if you’re paying for something yourself, you’ll be more cautious in your purchase. That kind of caution, in a democratic electorate, promotes good governance.