Skip to main content

Stage Two, nobody's grinning

In the book Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One, Thomas Sowell wrote that most bad public policies are a result of political decisions that consider “policies, institutions, or programs in terms of their hoped-for results” rather than the “actual characteristics of the processes set in motion.” If you've read a lot of Sowell then you may recall that he made this point in his 1980 book Knowledge and Decisions.

Politicians will only consider Stage One--the contrived press conference, the pretty press release pronouncing the great hoped-for results, the alleged short-term benefits, the clear beneficiaries. They don't address the long-term consequences of such policies or "invisible victims." Sowell highlights Stage One thinking when it comes to things such as business tax increases, price controls, minimum wage laws, anti-discrimination laws.

Snipped from a Cato Institute review of the book: In stage one, government raises the minimum wage, and entry-level workers get a pay increase. In stage two, fewer marginal workers are hired as employers stretch the existing staff to work harder and longer. Further down the road in stage three, the companies re-structure their operations and invest in labor-saving equipment, substituting capital—now relatively cheaper—for the more expensive labor.

To connect this to an issue in the news now: In stage one, a major increase in business taxes may meet its immediate goal of boosting the revenues collected by a city, county, or state government. But not too far down the road, in stage two, companies experiencing higher costs and diminishing profitability will begin to shift existing production to other locations. And in stage three, many companies already affected by the tax and others that might be looking for a plant or office site will choose to locate their facilities elsewhere.

Or, if we can believe the Wall Street Journal:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124329282377252471.html
Maryland couldn't balance its budget last year, so the state tried to close the shortfall by fleecing the wealthy. Politicians in Annapolis created a millionaire tax bracket, raising the top marginal income-tax rate to 6.25%. And because cities such as Baltimore and Bethesda also impose income taxes, the state-local tax rate can go as high as 9.45%. Governor Martin O'Malley, a dedicated class warrior, declared that these richest 0.3% of filers were "willing and able to pay their fair share." The Baltimore Sun predicted the rich would "grin and bear it."

One year later, nobody's grinning. One-third of the millionaires have disappeared from Maryland tax rolls. In 2008 roughly 3,000 million-dollar income tax returns were filed by the end of April. This year there were 2,000, which the state comptroller's office concedes is a "substantial decline." On those missing returns, the government collects 6.25% of nothing. Instead of the state coffers gaining the extra $106 million the politicians predicted, millionaires paid $100 million less in taxes than they did last year -- even at higher rates. No doubt the majority of that loss in millionaire filings results from the recession. However, this is one reason that depending on the rich to finance government is so ill-advised: Progressive tax rates create mountains of cash during good times that vanish during recessions. For evidence, consult California, New York and New Jersey (see here).

The Maryland state revenue office says it's "way too early" to tell how many millionaires moved out of the state when the tax rates rose. But no one disputes that some rich filers did leave. It's easier than the redistributionists think. Christopher Summers, president of the Maryland Public Policy Institute, notes: "Marylanders with high incomes typically own second homes in tax friendlier states like Florida, Delaware, South Carolina and Virginia. So it's easy for them to change their residency."

All of this means that the burden of paying for bloated government in Annapolis will fall on the middle class. Thanks to the futility of soaking the rich, these working families will now pay Mr. O'Malley's "fair share."

* * *

Or, as I've been saying for years...once I realize an ass-whipping is coming, don't expect me to show up on time for the scheduled event...

CJL

Popular posts from this blog

2014-02-14 Yeon-Mi Park`s debut

Yeonmi Park, February 14, 2014, making her debut! Yesterday I was one of the speakers at a special session on North Korean refugees at the Canadian Maple International School. Wow, it was a wonderful time! * Yeon-Mi Park delivered her first major speech in English. She was wonderful! She told her story (35 minute speech without notes), discussed different aspects of North Korea, and then handled questions from students for more than an hour. She did seem to be nervous at the beginning-she took a deep breath just as she started, looked at me, then told her story from her heart. * Returning from the speech, I told Yeonmi that she had star potential. She told me that she didn't believe it, but I told her that the way she handled Q&A and told her story, I would be lucky to have her still returning my phone calls within a year. * The students had many questions. They have been learning about North Korea. They are now reading "Escape from Camp 14" featuring Shin Dong-h...

Eliot & Casey are bad guys=Memorandum 46 is True!!!

Rev. Walter Fauntroy has responded to a column that Eliot Morgan and I published in the August 5 edition of the Washington Post. Unfortunately, some people are more focused on me and Eliot than they are on determining whether or not Memorandum 46 is a fraud. I'll concede that we are mean guys with bad personalities...does that mean that Memorandum 46 about black Americans is real? Anyway, a couple of observations and comments about Rev. Fauntroy's response : 1) WHERE'S THE FOIA REQUEST? On June 12 or 13, talk-show host Joe Madison invited Rev. Fauntroy on his show for a discussion about Memorandum 46. At that time, Rev. Fauntroy said that they (apparently the Congressional Black Caucus and colleagues) asked for--and were granted--a Freedom of Information request for Memorandum 46. You would think that, in a commentary of more than 2,200 words, that Rev. Fauntroy would have mentioned the FOIA request that must have been stamped with FOIA on it to prove that Memorand...

Park Jin welcoming remarks to FSI (and Casey Lartigue)

  National Assembly member Park Jin makes the welcoming remarks at FSI's conference featuring North Korean diplomats. Park Jin | Greeting message to FSI and Casey Lartigue mention - YouTube

[Video] "Author Spotlight" by Harvard

On February 2nd from 2-3 a.m. (Korea time), I was the featured speaker at an "Author Spotlight" by the Harvard Division of Continuing Education (DCE) and the Harvard Extension Alumni Association (HEAA) .  Watch, like, share, and comment.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmRgP3q7rQg&list=PLn7xtnmarHFq6kVvq3PxOgC8nwjn8ioBO  * * *  I will be in the USA for two weeks in March, I will kick off the trip with a speech on the campus of the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HSGE) for its annual Alumni of Color Conference (AOCC). It will be a bit of a homecoming reunion, I was one of the speakers at the first HGSE AOCC in 2003.  Stay tuned, this will be preparation for a larger event later this year. Thanks to everyone who has helped make FSI's work possible. ( Stripe ) ( PayPal ).

Open door to N. Koreans (Korea Times, January 16, 2013) by Casey Lartigue, Jr.

Open door to N. Koreans By Casey Lartigue, Jr. Last Dec. 12, I fired off an opinion piece of about 1,500 words to the Washington Post. It easily could have been 1,600 words, but I deleted all of the curse words. The day before, I had learned that the United States government had rejected visa applications by three of the students at the Mulmangcho School for North Korean refugee adolescents. Mulmangcho (meaning, ``forget-me-not”) is a small alternative school located in Yeoju, more than an hour south of Seoul. It opened last September with 11 former North Korean children who are orphans or are disadvantaged in some other way. It was founded by former national assembly member Park Sun-young and a distinguished board of directors. Why were the youngsters rejected? The explanation I got: 1) The U.S. government is concerned that they might not return to South Korea and 2) there was a question about their refugee status because they didn’t have pr...