Your Payment is Now Due

While the administration weighs options to bolster the economy and attempt to right this ship, one of the great ideas is to create jobs and stimulate the economy simultaneously by spending on infrastructure.

There can be no argument that the expenditure and efforts are badly needed. Infrastructure in this country, from simple bridges to entire interstate roadways to water treatment facilities, has been neglected and in decline for decades. Bridge collapses, levy failures – all in the news in the last couple of years.

There’s work to be done, and there are plenty of people willing to work. Nationwide unemployment is still hovering above 9%. That’s a lot of people who just want to get back to work.

Infrastructure spending doesn’t mean solely construction jobs, either. Construction and engineering firms need supplies, which are purchased from other companies. Those companies in turn need support staff to handle orders, track inventory, etc. And so on, and so on.

And while it’s no magic bullet, it would accomplish two much-needed objectives – 1) putting people back to work, and 2) addressing decades-old problems by improving, maintaining and building for the future.

So, with all of the benefits that could come from infrastructure spending, everyone would have to be in favor of it. Right?

Ah, wait. I’ve forgotten one very important facet. It’s this – Cash and commerce are, evidently, the sole domain of the “Party of No”.

And their campaign sponsors, of course.

To be fair, businesses and corporations exist for only one purpose – to grow. Yes, they employ people. Yes, the usually produce goods or offer services. Occasionally they even do something good for society.

But, in evolutionary terms, a corporation’s sole purpose in existing is to get bigger. And bigger means more money. And having more money means not giving money away, I suppose.

But consider this, business owners and lovers of capitalism and commerce – The roads that your goods travel on as they get to the consumer, and the subsidized airlines your executives travel on, the ports where your goods arrive from their outsourced manufacturers and the broadband communications technology you and your employees use hundreds of times per day – all of this is paid for, in part or in full, by taxes. All of it.

And without it, you would have no affordable way to get your goods to the customer, to make more money, to communicate across continents and seas with partners and investors, etc.

You see, taxes are necessary for your company to grow. It takes money to make money. And yes, that means it takes some of your money too. You ought to know that. You ought to know better.

So how is it, then, that the Republicans can continue to see tax cuts as a stimulating factor for the economy?

I’m by no means an economic wizard, but doesn’t it seem that in order to spend money, you have to have money coming in? I’m pretty sure the bank won’t let me “deficit spend” for the next 30 years without consequence. (If they would, you can bet I’d be in the tropics right now, not sitting in a cube in the middle of Nowhere, USA.)

So how can the Republicans argue that cutting the amount of money available to the government and its programs and agencies would somehow make money appear, or stimulate the economy?

Am I missing something in the equation?

As mentioned in the article above, Republicans want to extend the Bush tax cuts (the same ones that already took a federal budget surplus and flushed it down the toilet like narcotics agents were at the door ala Goodfellas) for everyone – Not just for families making under $250K per year (as the administration is proposing).

I’ll admit to a bit of personal bias here, because in my 30+ years on this earth I still, to this day, cannot fathom living in a household making anywhere near $250K per year, let alone more than that.  I can’t even begin to imagine what that would look like. Literally.

[PERSONAL RANT MOMENT - I’m being dead serious here. What do people do with all that money? Are these the families sending their kids to college with a brand new Lexus/BMW/(insert other obnoxious luxury vehicle badge here)? Is that all you can think to do with that money?

Because, if so, I’m thinking you could buy your kid a used Honda and, I don’t know, be ok with paying your fair share of taxes back to the country that provided you the opportunity to earn that kind of cash in the first place. /PERSONAL RANT MOMENT]

Let me rewind again for a second. Since I don’t know what it is like to earn that kind of money, it’s fairly easy for me to say “I’m ok with paying my fair share, even if I do make that much”, etc. BUT, that’s because my frame of reference is limited in that respect.

I can tell you, however, that I don’t really mind paying taxes on the amount I currently make. Would I love to make more money, to have more money? Of course. The bills aren’t paying themselves, you know. But since I use roads and sidewalks and crossing paths every day, and since I’ve had to occasionally call the police department, and since I like having the option of going to a local library when I need to find a book or answer a question, I don’t really mind taxes. I’m definitely getting something out of them.

Both personal and corporate tax rates in this country have been artificially low for decades. And while it has led to unprecedented prosperity for a select few, most of us have had only potholes, layoffs and reduced services to show for it.

I’m not proposing some sort of Robin Hood policy, taking from the rich and all that. But people should be willing to pay for what they use. The guy with the $80,000 Audi is using the same road I am. So is the guy with the $250,000 Ferrari. So they should be willing to pay their “fair share”, as it were.

Just what that “fair share” amounts to, I can’t say. As I mentioned earlier, I’m no economic wizard. But I do know that it’s going to take a whole mess of money to fix things, and right now we don’t have it.

And tax cuts aren’t going to magically generate a pot of gold, contrary to what you may have heard.

If your combined household income is $500K/year, I am genuinely glad for you. That’s very successful. I am glad to see that people are able to succeed on that level. (And I may be available for adoption.)

But as you’re driving to work each day, or dropping your kids off for school, think of how much the road costs to build and maintain. Think about how much money goes to the school (because even private schools get funding and/or subsidies from the local and federal governments).

Then imagine if all of those associated costs were on one big credit card balance.

YOUR credit card.

Because the money’s already been spent. And we’ve put off paying it back for a long, long time.

Now let’s talk about getting you on a payment plan…