Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Where I disagree with Economist and Business

I have not checked these numbers, and do not expect to do so, though I would imagine they are about right. I do not quite agree with Justin on the culprit being the loss of tax revenues precisely, but the Republican negative Spending of Tax cuts, combined with both Parties insisting on the Pork Barrel for their individual States to election support. The elimination of the Tax Cuts, and suppression of outrageous Pork Barrel, would have easily led to a distinct Surplus of tax revenues. It is my estimate that there would have been no Financial Crisis, Recession, or Stimulus without the Tax Cuts, and this leads Us to consider the Question of funding Government at all levels through the Interim Period.

Join with economists in the groan realizing that these are my estimates. The real Question becomes where does One start to unravel the complex puzzle. I’ll start with the contention that there would have been 21% less Construction commissioned since 2000 without the full Republican Tax Cuts, and the joint Tax deductions favoring Mortgages. This would lead me to surmise that 74-78% of the at risk mortgages would not have been issued. It also leads me to the conclusion that Resource pricing for Construction would have been some 14% less in Price over the entire Period than was experienced. Occupancy rates among Commercial Property would never have dropped below 70%, and the added Rents would have provided equal Profits to the financial community which they did experience. Consumers would never have refinanced their homes to subsidize their Consumption patterns, and their debt ratios would have been about 31% less than it is at Present; this within a scenario that actual Retail consumption would not have decreased more than 8% of the rates expressed through the Period.

We now turn to the question of Employment. Business would have had to take measures to reinforce Consumption throughout the Period under discussion, and would have accepted a Profit/Item ratio which was 11% less, and resulted in Business Profits which were only about 18% less overall. The interesting element here, comes in my consideration the about 8% of that lost Profit/Item would have went to Labor Cost. Here will come the real contention with my estimates: my belief that the 8% of Profits/Item would have developed into a 21% increase in the Labor Rolls over the entire Period. People have often asked Why I was so against the Bush Tax Cuts and Tax Deductions; I think you may better understand my position. lgl

No comments: