Towards the top of my ever-growing list of political pet peeves, is the question "How will we pay for tax cuts?"

For a final time, I’ll go back to my question which is, the extension of the tax cuts would cost $3.2 trillion. That’s borrowed money, that adds to the deficit. Do you have a plan to pay for that extension? -- MTP host David Gregory

This isn't exactly rocket science here. Cutting taxes doesn't cost the government a penny. It's absurd to claim it does. Nonsensical. Ludicrous. Stupid. Moronic. Batty. Daft. A Big Fat Statist Lie!

Don't fall for the realpolitik tax cut trap. It's a fools game, rigged to benefit the Ruling Class and the Ruling Class alone. The following brief article explains this fact of life beautifully.

Paying for Tax Cuts? Whose money is it?

"How will we pay for the tax cut?"

I laugh when I hear that question because it’s so obviously illogical. If the government were to cut taxes, say, by lowering rates or outright repeal, people would simply be free to hold on to money they otherwise would have sent to the IRS under threat of punishment. Allowing them to keep that money requires no expenditure. If the tax cut is dramatic enough, it might save money by permitting a shrinking of the government’s tax-collection machine. In the most basic sense, a tax cut costs nothing.

What people who ask that question really mean is: How will the revenue forgone be made up? Why do they care? Because they don’t want the government to have to cut spending.

Tax cuts don’t cost money; government programs do.

The demand that tax cuts be paid for rests on the claim that government distribution of other people’s resources – euphemistically called "spending" – is sacrosanct. If you dare to propose that less money be sucked into the government’s coffers through one form of taxation, you’d darn well have a plan to make up that lost money because cutting spending is out of the question. That means raising other taxes to offset the cuts.

For those interested in freedom – which must include the freedom to keep the fruits of one’s own labor – that is hardly a satisfactory solution. Do I really care if I surrender my money through an income tax or a sales tax? It’s the demand that I surrender it at all that irritates me.

The question might be intended to point out that revenue shortfalls would have to be made up by borrowing unless other taxes were raised. Borrowing, however, is another form of taxation. Advocates of freedom should always bring the conversation back to spending. Give no aid or comfort to those seeking to raise revenue.

Read the Whole Thing Here: Paying for Tax Cuts?

  • Matt

    CL, you beat me to this topic. I can't believe that anyone from the right would fall into arguing that false narrative. You can't pay for something that you never get.

    • theCL

      Yeah, I'm tired of the false arguments. I don't care who makes 'em, left, right, doesn't matter ... We're doomed unless we force the truth out of everyone. Especially out of those bastards in government!

  • John Carey

    It's all about language CL. Tell people enough times that the tax cut is going to be on borrowed money they start to believe it. The only way it is borrowed money is if the government doesn't cut spending and that is the lie of it.

    • steve

      Exactly, it is a language game. "Paying for tax cuts", the world famous "baseline budgeting" where a cut in the rate of increased spending is called a "cut" in spending.

  • Pingback: Your yes I am on vacation, Colorado here I come Linkapalooza! | The Daley Gator

  • Matt

    I had been thinking about posting something on this all week. You beat me to it. That being said, well done.

  • Pingback: American Free Enterprise. Dream Big. | Taxes and Spending