There Is No Santa
Opinion Editorial by Walter E. Williams -
Feb 5, 2009
33 ratings from readers
Does
Santa Claus exist? Congress definitely seems to think so. Why else
would it claim to create new jobs by taking money from one group of
people and giving it to another?
Here
is what my George Mason University colleague Professor Richard Wagner
wrote, which was published by Office of the House Republican Leader:
“Any so-called stimulus program is a ruse.
“The
government can increase its spending only by reducing private
spending equivalently. Whether government finances its added spending
by increasing taxes, by borrowing, or by inflating the currency, the
added spending will be offset by reduced private spending.
“Furthermore,
private spending is generally more efficient than the government
spending that would replace it because people act more carefully when
they spend their own money than when they spend other people’s
money.”
A
short translation of Wagner’s comment is: There is no Santa Claus
or Tooth Fairy. Let’s examine the ruse.
Suppose
the value of all that we will produce in 2009, our gross domestic
product (GDP), totals $14 trillion. There cannot be any disagreement
that if Congress spends $4 trillion, of necessity there is only $10
trillion left over for us to spend privately.
In
other words, if Congress is going to spend $4 trillion, it must find
a way to get us to spend $4 trillion less. The most open and
aboveboard method to force us to spend less privately is to tax us to
the tune of $4 trillion.
You
might say, “Congress doesn’t have to tax us $4 trillion. They
could tax us $3 trillion and run a $1 trillion budget deficit.” You
have that wrong. There is no way for Congress to spend $4 trillion
out of our 2009 $14 trillion GDP by getting us to spend only $3
trillion less privately. It has to be $4 trillion less.
Another
method to force us to spend less privately is to print money and
inflate the currency. Rising prices reduce our ability to spend
privately since each dollar we hold will not buy as much.
Another
way is for Congress to borrow, thereby reducing our ability to spend
privately. By the way, all of this means that in any real economic
sense the federal budget is always balanced. That is, if Congress
spends $4 trillion we must privately spend $4 trillion less whether
it is accomplished through taxation, inflation or borrowing.
The
stimulus package being discussed is politically smart but
economically stupid. It’s that bedeviling, omnipresent Santa Claus
and Tooth Fairy problem again. Let’s say that Congress taxes you
$500 to put toward creating construction jobs building our
infrastructure. The beneficiaries will be quite visible, namely men
employed building a road. The victims of Congress are invisible and
are only revealed by asking what you would have done with the $500 if
it were not taxed away from you.
Whatever
you would have spent it on would have contributed to someone’s
employment. That person is invisible. Politicians love it when the
victims of their policies are invisible and the beneficiaries
visible. Why? Because the beneficiaries know for whom to vote and the
victims do not know who is to blame for their plight.
In
stimulus package language, if Congress taxes to hand out money, one
person is stimulated at the expense of another, who pays the tax, who
is unstimulated.
A
visual representation of the stimulus package is: Imagine you see a
person at work taking buckets of water from the deep end of a
swimming pool and dumping them into the shallow end in an attempt to
make it deeper. You would deem him stupid. That scenario is
equivalent to what Congress and the new president proposes for the
economy.
A
far more important measure that Congress can take toward a healthy
economy is to ensure that the 2003 tax cuts don’t expire in 2010 as
scheduled. If not, there are 15 separate taxes scheduled to rise in
2010, costing Americans $200 billion a year in increased taxes. In
the face of a recession, we don’t need that.
Walter E. Williams
is a professor of economics at George Mason University in Fairfax,
Virginia. He has authored more than 150 publications, including many in
scholarly journals, and has frequently given expert testimony before
Congressional committees on public policy issues ranging from labor
policy to taxation and spending.