Deficit Polls: Tax Increases vs Spending
By Barry Ritholtz - September 19th, 2011, 4:15PM
More people support tax increases then the doctrinaire right-wing position favoring spending cuts during a weak economy.
Here’s Bruce Bartlett:
>
|
Can/Should the Budget Deficit Be Reduced with Spending Cuts Alone or Should There Be Some Increase in Taxes?
|
|||
|
Poll
|
Date
|
Some/All Taxes
|
No Taxes/
All Spending
|
|
9-16-11
|
74
|
21
|
|
|
9-14-11
|
48
|
38
|
|
|
8-26-11
|
69
|
29
|
|
|
8-10-11
|
66
|
33
|
|
|
8-10-11
|
63
|
36
|
|
|
8-9-11
|
68
|
29
|
|
|
8-4-11
|
63
|
34
|
|
|
8-2-11
|
60
|
40
|
|
|
7-26-11
|
68
|
19
|
|
|
7-25-11
|
56
|
34
|
|
|
7-21-11
|
64
|
34
|
|
|
7-19-11
|
66
|
32
|
|
|
7-19-11
|
62
|
27
|
|
|
7-18-11
|
69
|
28
|
|
|
7-14-11
|
67
|
25
|
|
|
7-13-11
|
73
|
20
|
|
|
6-9-11
|
61
|
37
|
|
|
6-9-11
|
59
|
26
|
|
|
5-13-11
|
64
|
33
|
|
|
5-12-11
|
61
|
27
|
|
|
4-29-11
|
76
|
20
|
|
|
4-25-11
|
62
|
33
|
|
|
4-22-11
|
66
|
19
|
|
|
4-20-11
|
62
|
36
|
|
|
3-15-11
|
67
|
31
|
|
|
12-12-10
|
62
|
36
|
|
|
11-26-10
|
65
|
33
|
|
|
Average
|
64.5
|
30
|
|
Bookmark/Search this post with
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
September 19th, 2011 at 4:30 pm
Since most of the “No Taxes/All Spending” responders are likely to be voting in Republican primaries and probably make up the vast majority of those primary votes, then the resounding answer is “Yes – the public overwhelmingly backs no tax increases and significant spending cuts.”
The other two-thirds of the population gets to make their voice heard in November 2012 since pollsters don’t vote in Congress.
September 19th, 2011 at 4:36 pm
The question referred to closing the budget deficit not about the advisability of raising taxes in a soft economy. Extrapolating from the first question to an answer to raising taxes in a soft economy seems suspect.
Second, it seems likely those favoring tax increases are really favoring tax increases on someone else and not on themselves. Bartlett’s post is useless.
September 19th, 2011 at 4:37 pm
Regardless of who votes when, these polls clearly and consistently show that the “public” — not the Republican primary voters, not the maybe, shoulda, woulda, coulda voters, not the disenfranchised, disgusted, discouraged, or even angry voters – not but “public” prefers, on average, at least some tax increases by a 2:1 margin. That is what this set of data shows.
September 19th, 2011 at 4:39 pm
RC: correct, this is in the context of budget reduction and, as is always true, most people find it easier to argue for taxes to be levied on someone else. That said, the data does not suggest that in the context of budget reductions the “public” are against raising taxes.
September 19th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
The Teabagger types don’t need no stinkin majority, all they need is enough votes to make the country ungovernable.
The millionaire/fairness tax proposal by O’B was brilliant politics – although Uncle Warren should be given credit.
As for the “class warfare” accusation – well maybe some tax fairness will head that off.
September 19th, 2011 at 4:50 pm
In response to “Rick Caird Says:”
The question was asked what should be done—now—and we are in a weak economy—now—so the question IS about what BR says it is about, and there is no mention of WHO the taxes are to be on, so you can’t assume that the respondents are talking about taxing someone else, not themselves. Please don’t make up your own reality and then disparage the post on that account.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:02 pm
Wouldn’t the question would better reflect reality if it broken down into three parts instead 0f two? -All taxes, all spending, or some of both. That way, you could smoke out the doctrinaire positions on both sides. I suppose ideology doesn’t exist on the left?
September 19th, 2011 at 5:08 pm
In reply to “ancientone Says: ”
There is more than one economy in the US right now. There is the economy where Wallmart is missing their sales targets and Dollar Store’s are stealing their customers and the economy where Ferrari has presold their 2012 production run and their are waiting lists for $35,000 purses. One is terribly weak the other is suffering from massive inflationary pressure. We live in a bifurcated economy. I know, I live inside the beltway in Washington DC, and their is no hurt here as compared to most of the country. Taxes at this point in the game should be paid by those who have the ability to pay with the least impact to the economy.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
QUESTION: How do you defend the billionaire’s position of not wanting to return to the Clinton era rates while cutting veterans’ benefits…
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/19/us/retiree-benefits-for-the-military-could-face-cuts.html
ANSWER: You can’t.
The GOP media machine is in trouble and the irony is their funders will do just fine under the Clinton era rates, they did last time.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
I believe:
“tax cuts for the top 1%” = “tax increases for the bottom 99%”.
When we shift from “tax and spend” to “borrow and spend”, the difference comes from government “borrowing” into existence more fiat. Who pays for the currency depreciation at the gas station and grocery store? Everybody. But, whereas the extra $$ the rich spend is but a small percentage of asset gains, the poor spend it all.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:14 pm
…and then some.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:25 pm
The question should’ve ben framed as “my taxes” vs. “no taxes”. Because when people say “some taxes” they always mean somebodyelses taxes , just no theirs. I pay enough taxes for the services I get , thank you very much.
September 19th, 2011 at 5:36 pm
i think raising taxes on those who have it and corporations especially needs to happen if we’re to expect civilization to stay glued together. The only problem i have is that then the government will misspend even MORE of our money. There’s so much waste, graft and pollution in our system now that i hesitate to give the government even more to leverage out the wazoo and dig our debt hole even deeper. If the increased taxes were combined with becoming more efficient or paying off the debt, if the services provided actually had some value (let’s face it they aren’t keeping up with basic maintenance folks), if the energy we use wasn’t so fragile (if you think this year was an aberation – get used to it) we could live on this planet for a long time to come.
The road we’re on is a dead end.
Oh and hey, speaking of which, did you see this?:
http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/homepage-feature/item/26796-notorious-convicted-killer-thomas-capano-found-dead-in-delaware-prison-cell&Itemid=1
September 19th, 2011 at 5:59 pm
The problem with polls is that they can and do change suddenly. Along these lines someone else on this blog pointed out that the American public is naïve and the poor working people in the United States believe that they can still make it on their own and will have to pay the bill for all this government help that they will supposedly get.
If the government were a business (well a well run business) the first thing it would look to do is get more from the existing spending 3.5 Trillion or so and its existing wokforce http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_federal_spending_chart_12_F.html
I wonder if the people that took this pool know how many employees the federal government has. Here are a few numbers.. http://www.bls.gov/oco/cg/cgs041.htm
Department of veteran’s affairs 288,000
Home land Security 170,000
Department of the Treasury 88,000
Federal Reserve 16,000
Department of Energy 16,000
To put this in perspective
Number of employees at General Motors 209,000
Number of employees at cost co 155,000
Number of employees at Apple 34,000
September 19th, 2011 at 6:02 pm
> MrBig Says:
> Wouldn’t the question would better reflect reality if it broken down into three parts instead
> 0f two? -All taxes, all spending, or some of both. That way, you could smoke out the
> doctrinaire positions on both sides. I suppose ideology doesn’t exist on the left?
Was curious about this too. From the CBS poll:
q75 Do you think any plan to reduce the federal budget deficit should include only taxincreases, or only spending cuts, or a combination of both tax increases and spending cuts?
Only tax increases – 3%
Only spending cuts – 21%
Both – 71%
—
Another way the question was asked: (same poll)
Should Taxes on Incomes Over $250K be Raised to Reduce the Deficit?
Yes – 56%
No – 37
—
Want more whiplash? (Again, same poll.)
Measures to Create Jobs (Good idea / bad idea)
Cut taxes for small business – 81% / 14%
Spending money on infrastructure – 80% / 16%
Payroll tax cut – 56% / 30%
Providing money to state govts. to avoid layoffs – 52% / 40%
September 19th, 2011 at 6:11 pm
So it seems there is a consensu in terms of the gov’t needing to be more efficient. The larger the organization the larger the efficiency challenge. True for gov’t and global banks with rogue traders.
The question re: a willingness to pay more taxes could have been better. What I don’t get are statements questioning any presumed objectivity of one political perspective relative to the other. Of course each are biased. No reasonably intelligent person thinks otherwise, including when they think of their own.
September 19th, 2011 at 6:25 pm
the, embedded, assumption is that ~”each, and every, U$D spent by the USGov, is done so “efficiently”", no?
“…DOD accounts for 15 of the 27 programs on GAO’s high-risk list, reflecting the department’s critical need for better management and business transformation.
“We should have zero tolerance for waste,” Walker said.
Business transformation will take a long time, and DOD’s senior leadership has shown it is committed to addressing long-standing weaknesses, Walker said, adding. “DOD’S current approach is clearly superior to its prior approach; however, progress has been inconsistent and a number of challenges remain.”
In addition to a full-time CMO, the department needs a single, integrated plan to guide its business transformation. The plan should go beyond systems, with key metrics and milestones and roles and responsibilities for success, he said.
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), subcommittee chairman, supports a full-time CMO, which is in a House version of the DOD authorization bill. The Senate provision assigns the CMO to the deputy Defense secretary, as it is now.
The outlook for growing and unsustainable federal deficits and debt levels adds to the urgency for DOD to transform its operations, Walker said…”
http://fcw.com/articles/2007/10/17/gao-dod-needs-cmo-to-guide-business-transformation.aspx
~~
WASHINGTON, DC (February 16, 2011) — The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) today released the biennial update to its list of federal programs and operations at “high risk” for waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement or needing broad-based transformation.
Gene L. Dodaro, Comptroller General of the United States and head of the GAO, announced that the Interior Department’s management of oil and gas resources has been added to the high-risk list. At the same time, Dodaro noted that two issues—the Department of Defense’s (DOD) personnel security clearance program and the 2010 Census—had been dropped from the list because of sufficient progress in addressing past vulnerabilities. As a result of these changes, a total of 30 programs and operations are on GAO’s 2011 high-risk list.
“Although oil and gas resources represent one of the largest sources of revenue for the federal government, it’s far from clear that Interior has been collecting all the funds to which the American people are entitled. I am hopeful that the addition of this area to the high-risk list will encourage the Department to successfully make fundamental changes to enhance its ability to carry out its important mission,” Dodaro said.
The Comptroller General released the 2011 list (GAO-11-278 – http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-278) at a bipartisan briefing on Capitol Hill with leaders of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee….”
http://yubanet.com/usa/GAO-Releases-Latest-High-Risk-List-Of-Programs-At-Risk-For-Waste-Fraud-And-Abuse.php
The “Poll” is Agitprop..
September 19th, 2011 at 6:28 pm
Lets see, we keep hearing the argument “we can’t raise taxes or we will impact job growth”. So far, no taxes have been raised and I don’t see any businesses creating jobs! Who’s kidding who? Just take off the Bush tax cuts and remove all the windfall tax relief programs out there and there are no new taxes; just old taxes that should not have been removed. The Bush era spent like thieves and cut revenue which just doesn’t compute.
September 19th, 2011 at 6:33 pm
The two Bush tax cuts have been in place for eight and ten years now.
If tax cuts create jobs, then where are the jobs?
September 19th, 2011 at 6:34 pm
@ Mr Big:
The question has been structured just the way the Republicans position has been taken. On the side that states “Some/All Taxes”, “some” assumes the remainder after some, comes out of spending cuts. I think it just follows the way the parties are positioned.
September 19th, 2011 at 7:19 pm
Raise the top marginal rate… watch new loopholes sprout up like weeds.
You really want revenue, you’ve got to go after people in the $40K-$150K/year income range.
September 19th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
“Results from the Reason-Rupe poll actually demonstrate a willingness by a majority of Americans to increase taxes on the “wealthy.” However these preferences depend greatly on how one defines wealthy. The poll asked the standard question “Do you think the federal government should increase taxes on the wealthy,” with 69 percent in favor and 28 percent opposed. However, respondents in favor were then asked what household income they would use to define someone who is wealthy and should therefore pay higher taxes. Respondents consistently listed incomes that were above their own, even high-income respondents, suggesting that people may want to raise taxes, but just not on themselves.
For instance, the interquartile range among those making less than $25,000 a year ranged from $100,000 to $500,000 a year. Yet, those making $100,000-$199,000 defined wealthy as $250,000 to $5000,000. Those making over $200,000 defined wealthy from $300,000 to $1,000,000. The graphic below compares each income group to that groups’ preferred definition of the term “wealthy.” Each group typically wants to tax those who make more than they do.”
http://reason.com/poll/2011/09/19/tax-the-rich2
September 19th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Rohdewarrior, someone’s “wealthy” though. Right? Yes, people differ on the definition. That doesn’t mean the “wealthy” don’t exist. Or was that the subtle message of that “Reason” poll?
Here’s someone who’s “wealthy” and donates to “Reason”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_activities_of_the_Koch_family
September 19th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
Obama is proposing a new tax rate to make sure thaqt millionaires pay their fair share of tax.
I have a great marketing idea for him. They should call it the “Alternative Minimum Tax.”
September 19th, 2011 at 10:55 pm
The polls speak volumes about current America….especially our educational system.
I wager many resonding to raise taxes fully expect only the well-heeled to pay. Boy, are they in for an unpleasant surprise.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Spending cuts sounds so negative; I prefer to call it government evisceration. Everything from the DOE’s loans to stimulate the renewal energy sector, to the GSE interference in the housing markets, to the bloated military much be questioned, justified or eliminated.
I would gladly pay more if I felt that it was going to be spent effectively; sadly, I know that it can not.
September 19th, 2011 at 11:36 pm
I’m not playing this game,
Lets see the answers to the question:
Can/Should the Budget Deficit Be Reduced with Tax Increases on the Greedy Rich Bastards alone, or Should There Be Some spending reductions?
Oh wait you have a problem with the question? too bad this is my poll!
In this age of digital interaction and the long tail, there is no reason for people to put up with pollsters framing the questions to their advantage. Demand an other option.
September 20th, 2011 at 1:13 am
So the GOP is sailing along with the winds of Obama’s blunders in their sails and they suddenly decide to turn the cannons on their own ship.
As that great philosopher Popeye would say:
I shakes me head
September 20th, 2011 at 7:09 am
>> theexpertisin Says:
>> I wager many resonding to raise taxes fully expect only the well-heeled to pay. Boy, are they in for an unpleasant surprise.
The poor have been “paying” via lost jobs and lower-paying jobs via globalization — which helps the rich. So, no surprise there. The only surprise should be if or when the poor ever recognize that they’re paying an inflation tax courtesy of those tax cuts for the rich.
>>The polls speak volumes about current America….especially our educational system.
Which school taught you the working class isn’t being screwed already?
September 20th, 2011 at 8:37 am
As critical as I’ve been of Obama and his feckless leadership, yesterday’s speech and the Boehner/Ryan lame-ass “job creator” and “class warfare” bull shit response showed that the right-wing rhetoric is very weak and vulnerable. Holy jeebus, all these guys know how to do is bleat Frank Lutz talking points like a bunch of parrots!
Now, will Obama press on the offensive? History tells us he won’t. But now is the time to put the full weight of his shoe on the neck of these ideologues and make them squeal. If he does that, showing some real balls, real leadership and genuine conviction for core democratic principles, he may just win back my support. But that all starts with blasting the right’s bogus arguments on taxation of the rich to smithereens.
September 20th, 2011 at 10:03 am
Credit Bubble+CDS=New Taxes
September 20th, 2011 at 12:34 pm
BTW, apparently the US IRS believes that Canadian taxes are lower than US taxes. the IRS is demanding that the Canadian banks report on the American tax cheats who have fled to Canada to reduce their tax burden: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/canadian-finance-minister-tells-irs-to-back-off-2011-09-20?link=home_carousel