You are on page 1of 5

Talpallikar-Tang

DECEMBER PRO MANUSCRIPT


We stand resolved: The United States should prioritize tax increases over spending cuts Our affirmation focuses on 2 key points: 1) Spending Cuts cause more harm than good 2) Tax increases solve the deficit

We define the following: Should- expressing obligation, propriety, or expediency (Merriam-Webster) Prioritize- designate or treat something as more important than something else. Tax- a compulsory financial contribution imposed by a government to raise revenue, levied on the income or property of persons or organizations, on the production costs or sales prices of goods and services, etc

OBSERVATION ONE:
The con side should, at the bare minimum, tell us which sectors they would cut from. If they dont, then the pro side has no ability to respond to their arguments. Furthermore,

According to the United States Government, Entitlements (61.9%) and Military spending (18.7%) together make up 80.6% of our spending Thus, if the con side wishes to argue the economics, they MUST cut spending in these areas. If they do not, then they are not actually impacting the round.

C ONTENTION O NE : S PENDING C UTS


THAN GOOD

CAU SE MORE HARM

Explain:

S UBPOINT A: S PENDING
Evidence:

CUTS TRASH O UR ECONOMY

[Michael; Director of State Fiscal Research; Governors are Proposing Further Deep Cuts in Services, Likely Harming Their Economies; Center for Budget and Policy Priorities; http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3389 ; retrieved 10 November 2012]

A CBPP article states that: Cutting state services not only harms vulnerable residents but also slows the economys recovery from recession by reducing overall economic activity. When states cut spending, they lay off employees, cancel contracts with vendors, reduce payments to businesses and nonprofits that provide services, and cut benefit payments to individuals. All of these steps remove demand from the economy. State and local governments have eliminated 450,000 jobs
since August 2008, federal data show, and state budget cuts have cost additional jobs in the private sector. These job losses shrink the purchasing power of workers families, which in turn affects local businesses and slows recovery. Moreover, many of the services being cut are important to states long-term economic strength. Research shows that in order to prosper, businesses require a well-educated, healthy workforce. Many of the state budget cuts described here will weaken that workforce in the future by diminishing the quality of elementary and high schools, making college less affordable, and reducing residents access to health care.

In

the long term, the savings from todays cuts may cost states much more in diminished economic growth.

Futhermore:

Cuts in defense spending will destroy the manufacturing sector.

A new National Association of Manufacturers study found that defense spending cuts will negatively impact manufacturers across the country, including defense contractors and their supply chains. By 2014, the economy would lose more than 1 million private sector jobs, including 130,000 in manufacturing. In addition, GDP would be nearly 1 percentage point lower.

THE NEW YORK TIMES EXPLAINS THAT


Christina Romer (Economics professor at UC Berkeley). New York Times. Cutting the Deficit, With Compassion. 9/8/12. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/09/business/cutting-the-deficit-compassionately-economicview.html?_r=0 A crude rule of thumb is that every $100 billion of deficit reduction [via spending cuts] will cost close to a million jobs in the near term. If that isnt a reason to move gradually, what is? But if you need another, just look at Europe.

S UBPOINT B: S PENDING C UTS THAT WILL SOLVE THE D EFICIT CAU SE BIGGER PROBLEMS I N OTHER AREAS
As the former Republican senator Alan Simpson says: "[IF WE PASS SPENDING CUTS] The little guy is going to be cremated."

SPENDING CUTS DESTROY THE LIFE OF THE POOR PEOPLE According to Nobel Prize winner, Joseph Stiglitz, in the past 10 years the income of the top 1% has risen by 18%, while that of bluecollar male workers has fallen by 12%. [DUE TO SPENDING CUTS].

Dave Johnson begins, Conservative Tax Tricks Did Tax Cuts Grow the Economy? Campaign for Americas Future, April 18, 201
Conservatives say that the economy boomed, and more revenue came in because

of the tax cuts. What actually happened was government deficits and the resulting accumulated debt exploded, while our defunded government has since been unable to maintain the infrastructure and public structures (laws, courts, regulations, protections, schools, etc...) that keep our economy competitive and our standard of living high.

According to the Washington Times:

Virginia Education Association President Meg Gruber argued that while [spending] cuts might trim the federal deficit, they work to the nations long-term detriment by diminishing the quality of education. We should be bolstering our programs, she said. not considering more cuts. In Virginia alone, educators say they stand to lose $75 million in federal funding and 1,300 jobs, most of which would come from special education and Head Start programs.

Furthermore, cutting spending often just passes the problem off to the States

The Washington times continues:

Officials in Arkansas say they are facing more than $25 million in lost federal education funding, as well as millions more in reductions to other public programs, which could make it very difficult to balance next years state budget

Contention Two: TAX INCREASES SOLVE THE DEFICIT

A New York Times article states that: But now, a growing body of research suggests not only that the government could raise much more revenue by sharply raising the top tax rates paid by the richest Americans, but it could do so without slowing economic growth. Top tax rates could go as high as 80 percent or more. Raising the top tax rates on the richest Americans could go a long way toward balancing the federal budget. Mr. Saez estimated that [and]raising the top tax rate [the tax rate] on the top 1 percent of earners to [only]67 percent would raise about $4 trillion over a decade.

RETURNING TO THESE PRE REAGAN TAX RATES IS PREFERABLE. According to the US Census bureau:

When Reagan cut TAXES AND SPENDING instead of increasing taxes,

The nominal national debt rose from $900 billion to $2.8 trillion, an average national budget deficit per year of $237.5 billion, as compared to an average national budget deficit per year of $56.9 billion during Carter's tenure.

Furthermore, according to Forbes Magazine:

-----------------------------|-----------------------------AFFIRM SIDE NEGATE

AS THE CHART REVEALS, THERE IS A CLEAR CORRELATION:


WHEN WE INCREASE TAXES, THE ECONOMY RECOVERS WHEN WE CUT TAXES, THE ECONOMY GOES BACK INTO RECESSION, AND STAYS THERE