Do You Really Know Your Candidate? Or Are You Just Following the Headlines?

In the ever-evolving debate on the size and role of government, one issue remains central: taxation. The philosophy of a smaller government that emphasizes tax reduction stands in stark contrast to a larger government that relies on higher taxes to fund its operations. This article explores the benefits of a tax-reducing government, particularly in a non-wartime scenario compared to a wartime context, while examining the ideological differences between conservatism, which often champions smaller government, and liberalism, which typically supports larger government.

Understanding Taxation in Different Government Models

Scenario: A Full-Time Employee Earning $100,000 Annually

For a worker making $100,000 a year, the tax burden can vary significantly based on government policies. Let's break down the potential taxes:

1. Federal Income Tax: A person earning $100,000 would likely fall into the 24% federal tax bracket, with an effective tax rate around 18%. This means approximately $18,000 in federal taxes.
2. State Income Tax: Depending on the state, this could add anywhere from 0% (in states like Texas or Florida) to over 9% (in states like California or New York), leading to additional costs of $0 to $9,000.
3. Social Security and Medicare: These federal programs take about 7.65% of income, amounting to $7,650.
4. Total Estimated Taxes: In a state with a moderate income tax rate (around 5%), the total tax burden for a $100,000 income could be roughly:
   • Federal Income Tax: $18,000
   • State Income Tax: $5,000 (approx. 5%)
   • Social Security: $7,650
   • Total: $30,650 or approximately 30.65% of their income.

The Impact of a Larger Government

When a government grows larger, it often necessitates higher taxes to fund its expanded services and programs. This model can have significant drawbacks:

1. Economic Disincentives: Higher taxes can discourage individual productivity and entrepreneurship. When individuals see a substantial portion of their income taxed away, they may be less motivated to work harder or invest in new ventures. This can stifle innovation and economic growth. Liberals often argue for higher taxes on the wealthy to redistribute wealth and fund social programs, while conservatives contend that this hampers economic motivation and job creation.
2. Increased Bureaucracy: Larger governments typically mean more bureaucracy. This can lead to inefficiencies, with taxpayer money often spent on administrative costs rather than direct services that benefit citizens. For example, a study found that larger government entities tend to have higher overhead costs, reducing the overall effectiveness of taxpayer funds. Conservatives often criticize this inefficiency, advocating for streamlined operations and reduced government intervention.
3. Limited Individual Freedom: High taxes can limit individual choice by reducing disposable income. Families may struggle to afford basic necessities, leading to a decreased quality of life and greater dependence on government support programs. While liberals may argue that social programs funded by higher taxes can provide essential support to vulnerable populations, conservatives argue that this can create a culture of dependency, undermining personal responsibility.

The Advantage of Smaller Government

Conversely, a smaller government focused on tax reduction can yield several benefits:

1. Increased Disposable Income: Lower taxes leave individuals with more disposable income, allowing them to spend, save, or invest according to their preferences. For a person earning $100,000, a tax reduction could mean thousands of dollars retained, stimulating local economies and boosting consumer spending. Conservatives champion this approach, arguing that individuals are better suited to allocate their resources more effectively than a large government.
2. Encouragement of Investment: When individuals and businesses are taxed less, they are more likely to invest in their ventures, leading to job creation and economic growth. This can create a positive cycle where increased economic activity generates additional tax revenue without raising tax rates. Liberals may counter that strategic government investment in infrastructure and education can also drive growth, but history shows that the private sector is more efficient in creating jobs.
3. Greater Personal Responsibility: A tax-reducing government encourages individuals to take personal responsibility for their financial      well-being. With more control over their income, citizens can allocate resources towards savings, education, and health care, which can lead to a healthier, more prosperous society. This aligns with conservative principles that emphasize self-reliance and limited government intervention.

The Role of Government Subsidies

It is important to consider the impact of government subsidies on this discussion. For individuals who rely on government assistance rather than maintaining a full-time career, the financial support they receive is funded by the taxes collected from the working class. In essence, the subsidies that help some individuals survive are generated by taking income from those who are actively contributing to the economy.

This creates a complex dynamic: working-class individuals may feel burdened by the redistribution of their hard-earned money to those who choose not to engage in the workforce. While some genuinely need support due to circumstances beyond their control, many others exploit the system, opting for government assistance instead of pursuing a career. This can lead to resentment among those who feel they are unfairly subsidizing others. Moreover, it creates dependency for individuals who prefer not to work for their income.

A good analogy is a domesticated bird. If you raise a bird in a cage and provide for all its needs, it will thrive. However, if you then let that bird out to live freely, it may struggle to survive in the wild. The key is to emphasize the importance of all able-bodied individuals participating in the workforce to earn their income, rather than relying on government assistance.

Aligning with Ideologies

If one supports government handouts and believes in a system that provides extensive social services, they are likely to align more closely with liberal policies and candidates. Liberals often advocate for increased funding for social programs and higher taxes on the working middle class to finance these initiatives, believing that it is the government's role to provide essential services for it’s citizens.

Conversely, if you are a working person who values keeping more of your hard-earned money and paying less in taxes, you will likely align more with conservative candidates. Conservatives typically advocate for smaller government, reduced taxes, and limited intervention in the economy, emphasizing personal responsibility and self-reliance.

Conclusion

In conclusion, a smaller government that emphasizes tax reduction offers numerous benefits over a larger government that relies on higher taxes. By promoting economic growth, encouraging personal responsibility, and enhancing individual freedom, a tax-reducing model can create a thriving economy.

Furthermore, when considering the implications of wartime versus peacetime, the advantages of a smaller government become even more pronounced. By prioritizing individual liberty and fiscal responsibility, a smaller government can empower citizens to take control of their financial futures, fostering a prosperous and resilient society.

Understanding these differing perspectives is crucial as we navigate the complexities of taxation and government size. Whether one is in favor of government support systems or prioritizes a working-class ethos, the alignment with liberal or conservative policies reflects deeply held beliefs about the role of government and individual responsibility in society.

Ultimately, voting is not just a right but a responsibility. It is our opportunity to shape the future and advocate for the values and policies that align with our beliefs. Each vote is a voice in the democratic process, making it essential for all citizens to participate and ensure their perspectives are heard.

George Bunker

www.georgebunker.net

With the 2024 election upon us, many Americans are closely watching the candidates’ policies to determine how the next administration could affect their pocketbooks. In one scenario, a Trump victory and a Republican-controlled Congress would bring a wave of tax cuts and pro-business policies that many economists agree will stimulate economic growth. On the other hand, if Kamala Harris and a Democratic-led Congress win, substantial investments in the Green New Deal, renewable energy initiatives, and social programs could reshape America’s economy. But what could these contrasting visions mean for everyday Americans?

A Trump Presidency and GOP-Controlled Congress: Lower Taxes and Economic Growth?

If Trump wins the presidency and the GOP takes control of Congress, his administration would likely focus on reducing corporate taxes, simplifying the tax code, and rolling back regulatory barriers that impact businesses. Here’s how these changes could impact the economy and American households:

1. Lower Taxes Across the Board
   With a unified Republican government, we can expect renewed efforts to lower taxes across various income levels, including corporate taxes. For businesses, reduced taxes often mean increased cash flow, which can be reinvested in growth and job creation. For middle-income households, tax cuts mean more money to cover expenses, save, or invest in the economy.
2. Boosting Small Businesses and Job Creation
   Reduced regulations can also support small businesses, which are often hit hardest by complex regulatory requirements. If Trump and the GOP can simplify regulations, we could see a revitalized small-business sector, which has traditionally been a primary driver of job creation in the U.S.
3. Decrease in Everyday Costs
   When businesses can operate more freely, costs generally decrease, leading to more competitive pricing on consumer goods and services. Lower taxes and decreased energy prices could ease everyday costs for Americans, from gas at the pump to utility bills and groceries.

A Harris Presidency and Democratic Congress: Investments in Green Initiatives and Social Programs

In contrast, a Kamala Harris administration with a Democratic majority in Congress would likely prioritize investments in green technology and social spending, increasing taxes to fund these ambitious projects. However, past investments in similar green initiatives have shown that they are not without challenges. Here’s what the economy could look like under Democratic leadership:

1. Increased Taxes to Fund Green New Deal and Social Initiatives
   Harris has signaled support for increased taxes on corporations and high-income earners to fund the Green New Deal and other environmental initiatives. However, the need for extensive funding raises questions about economic feasibility and effectiveness. Past green initiatives have often times struggled with fraud and financial mismanagement, leading to bankruptcies and incomplete projects.
2. Support for Green Energy Projects with Financial Risk
   While Harris’s green initiatives aim to transition the U.S. toward renewable energy, past green energy projects have seen significant financial setbacks. The infusion of taxpayer dollars into such projects carries risks, as prior investments have sometimes resulted in large-scale bankruptcies. High taxes needed to fund green initiatives could, therefore, carry hidden costs for taxpayers if these projects fail to deliver.
3. Expanded Social Programs and Support for Migrant Populations
   Democratic policies often include increased social spending on health,      education, and housing. While these expansions aim to enhance living standards for undocumented and recent immigrant populations, they would demand substantial funding and likely lead to higher taxes on all income producers and businesses. This shift could place a significant burden on U.S. residents, who may see a reduced quality of life as financial resources are reallocated. Citizens may feel their own lifestyle comforts compromised, while new residents benefit, leading to a sense of imbalance and economic strain for many Americans. 
4. Potential for Higher Consumer Costs and Economic Uncertainty
   Shifting toward a greener economy could mean higher consumer costs in the short term as industries adjust. Fuel, energy bills, and consumer goods tend to increase. And with financial concerns related to funding and managing green projects effectively, there’s a risk that taxpayers will bear a heavier burden if projects struggle or fail as has been the case in the past.

Comparing Economic Impacts for the Average American

For working Americans, the choice could come down to balancing comfort vs cost. A Trump administration will likely bring immediate relief through tax cuts and lower prices, especially for energy and consumer goods. In contrast, Harris’s green initiatives would require sacrifices for the long term through higher taxes, increased risk of financial instability, and potential for higher everyday costs.

Ultimately, the decision in 2024 may shape the country’s economic landscape for years to come, offering Americans two distinct visions for the future. Will voters prioritize immediate economic relief and business growth, or choose an administration focused on larger government, higher taxes, and policies that may curb the middle class's ingenuity, creativity, and economic incentives?

George Bunker

www.georgebunker.net

Sources:

Polling Data for 2024 Election: Information on recent polling averages for Harris vs. Trump, with Harris leading by a slim margin. The Hill’s Election Hub​.

Betting Odds for Presidential Candidates: Updated odds showing Trump favored over Harris in betting markets can be found on Odds Shark and other betting sites.

Historical Polling Errors in 2016: For more on the 2016 polling error, you can refer to analysis by FiveThirtyEight on the discrepancies in pre-election polling accuracy during the 2016 election (FiveThirtyEight).

Economic Policies and Their Impacts: Articles discussing the economic effects of tax policies and green initiatives can be found on Heritage Foundationand Brookings Institution.

As we approach election day, the excitement and anticipation surrounding this year's election are palpable. Recent data shows that former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris are in a statistical tie, with Trump at 48% and Harris closely following at 47%. This close race underscores the importance of every vote as we head toward the final stretch of the campaign.

In addition to the competitive polling numbers, early voting is off to a robust start, with approximately 15 million voters already having cast their ballots. Notably, 47% of these early voters identify as Democrats, while 33% identify as Republicans. This early turnout indicates a strong engagement among voters, highlighting the significance of making informed choices as we move closer to the election.

Voting is not just a right; it is an essential way to make your voice heard. Every vote counts, and your participation in the electoral process can have a profound impact on the future of our communities and the nation as a whole.

For those residing in Bell County, Texas, it’s crucial to stay informed about early voting locations and options. You can find detailed information on early voting sites, driving directions, and even download a voter’s guide to take with you to the polls by visiting https://georgebunker.net/polling-locations.

Remember, your voice matters, and voting is one of the most powerful ways to express your beliefs and priorities. Let’s make sure we all participate in shaping our future!

Update:  As of recent early voting data, Democrats make up around 45% of early votes cast, while Republicans account for about 38%, with the remaining 17% attributed to independents or other affiliations. This breakdown highlights a lead for Democrats in early voting turnout, though Republican turnout has reportedly improved compared to previous days and years. In key states like Michigan, Republican early voting rates are notably higher than in 2020, indicating a more competitive race this year as both parties mobilize their bases. 

George Bunker

www.georgebunker.net

Source: 

Fox News Early voting data may be sign of improved GOP ground game in pivotal swing state: expert