Fruits On Parade!

21 Comments

by: Colorado Pols

“Economic expert” Eric Fruits. (photo via Twitter)

A few weeks ago, we briefly discussed a “study” from a right-wing thinktank opposed to Initiative 25. To recap, that’s the ballot initiative proposed by Sen. Rollie Heath and supported by a range of fiscal policy and progressive groups, that would revert Colorado sales and income taxes to 1999 levels for five years to raise funds for public education.

The study authored by Oregon conservative economics professor Eric Fruits (photo right) asserts that if sales tax rates were to revert to 1999 levels for five years, it would result in some 30,500 in “reduced employment” by the end of that period in 2017. Due to an apparent simple math error that we freely admit was not made by Dr. Fruits, this 30,500 figure was compounded with the figure for prior years by the local proponents of his study. Including, very amusingly, the Colorado Senate GOP press office, arriving at the wildly spectacular figure of over 119,000 “jobs lost.” Which they have proceeded to trumpet in op-eds around the state.

Now, being a fellow conservative, Dr. Fruits doesn’t want to directly throw the people who paid for his study, or politicians “quoting” it, under the wheels–finally contacted by a Huffington Post writer to confirm or deny this figure, he replies with laughable walking-on-eggshells ambiguity:

If the tax increases remain in effect through 2017, then employment in that year would be 30,500 lower than otherwise. [Pols emphasis] I presented the information in the way I prefer to present it. It is up to the reader to decide whether to focus on the yearly ‘snapshots’ or add up the figures into job-years. Either approach seems to be widely accepted…

“Seems to be widely accepted?” You’ve got to hand it to this guy. After all, that number should probably appear somewhere in his study for it to be “accepted,” right? Why wouldn’t this chart, for example, pointed out by a commenter in the previous thread, count up to 119,000 in “reduced employment” instead of 30,000? Wasn’t the whole point of this thing to scare people?

Fruits didn’t quite revise Paul Revere’s Wikipedia page, which is a reflection of some basic degree of professional integrity for which we applaud him. But seriously, Dr. Fruits, the Senate Minority puts out erroneous nonsense, charitably ignored by local media, all the time. There’s really not much to be gained going out on a limb credibility-wise for them.

And here’s the bottom line: neither of these figures–119,000 “lost jobs,” or 30,000 in “reduced employment,” or whatever big scary number they come up with next–are believable for a host of reasons. The plainest, as we said originally, is the simple implausibility of the idea that 1999’s state sales and income tax rates, going back from 4.63% to 5% and 2.9% to 3% respectively, could result in the loss of over a hundred thousand jobs–an increase in the unemployed of over 50%. Colorado’s economy has never been as healthy as it was in 1999, when these taxes were cut. But more than that–the whole assumption, that your taxes are “too high” at any level is, as we’ve said over and over, fundamentally, irretrievably, we’re-sick-of-arguing-about-it wrong.

At a time when Washington is wrestling with how to end federal budget deficits and trim the national debt – huge questions that are expected to dominate the nation’s politics through the 2012 elections – the fact that Americans are under-taxed compared with U.S. historic norms is central to the discussion.

This fact is separate from the politically charged questions of whether government spends too much, the fairness of who pays how much and what we value or don’t in government spending. It’s simply that our tax burden is low in the long view of U.S. history, and there are many ways to measure that central truth. [Pols emphasis]

Folks, we don’t expect it to become a campaign slogan, but we’ll say it since somebody really needs to: your taxes are not “too high.” They are not “too high” today, and they were not “too high” in 1999 when they were last cut in in the state of Colorado. Just keep this in the back of your mind at all times: any time somebody says that you are paying more taxes, or “too much,” they are lying to you. You are paying lower taxes today, not higher, at almost every level of government–and this is what directly results in our state being continuously forced to make cuts to things like health care and education. Speaking federally, tax cuts are why we have a huge national debt to scare the public into support for budget cuts that otherwise harm their interests.

But above all, nonsense like this “expert” forecast of doom and gloom, however misrepresented, over a return to tax rates under which the state actually was quite prosperous–only 12 years ago–this kind of essential dishonesty is why we can’t have an honest conversation about taxes.

21 thoughts on “Fruits On Parade!”

ArapaGOP says:

June 25, 2011 at 2:25 am

Reality check:

http://www.coloradopeakpolitic…

Multiple sources are telling the Peak that the confluence of a tax-hostile political environment, Senator Rollie Heath’s bumbling political roll out, and concerns over huge new job losses in an already fragile Colorado recovery have all but doomed Heath’s $3 billion tax hike plan slated for the ballot this November.

Two sources in particular say amplified chatter recently makes them more and more confident that the measure may not even make the ballot at all. If it does, all of our sources say that there is no financial commitment from any of the major financial players on the Left that would be needed to get an unpopular measure like Heath’s passed.

Said one Peak source, “I guess they don’t have a rebuttal to 119,000 lost jobs.”

Log in to Reply
1. ClubTwitty says:
  
  June 25, 2011 at 2:41 am
  
  Glad to see they are so bold with their pronouncements to put their name to it.
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. RedGreen says:
    
    June 25, 2011 at 4:49 am
    
    are using made-up numbers to affirm the conclusions they’ve already reached. So what’s new at that Peak joint?
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. sxp151 says:
      
      June 25, 2011 at 5:05 am
      
      does that count as “multiple”?
      
      Log in to Reply
2. DavidThi808 says:
  
  June 25, 2011 at 4:32 am
  
  Heath’s plan is absolutely pro-business. The decimation of education funding in this state is significantly harming every industry that depends on an educated workforce.
  
  Raise my taxes 10% and give me an educated workforce – and I’ll double my profits and come out ahead.
  
  Log in to Reply
Ralphie says:

June 25, 2011 at 3:27 am

Has no chance.

Let’s move on to a real discussion.

Log in to Reply
1. sxp151 says:
  
  June 25, 2011 at 5:20 am
  
  i.e., do nothing and hope for a reelection, which would present the opportunity to do possibly also do nothing. At least Heath’s plan could eventually start a discussion (if it’s not shot down too early).
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Ralphie says:
    
    June 25, 2011 at 6:00 am
    
    if it’s not shot down too early
    
    I just think it has no chance with the voters, and your “if” clause, above, is a legitimate worry.
    
    Starting a discussion is way different from actually getting something done.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. sxp151 says:
      
      June 25, 2011 at 6:39 am
      
      it forces voters to think about what the status of education funding is. People may say, “Screw the schools, I want lower taxes,” but they won’t say it too openly, and might not be willing to say it at all next year.
      
      I agree with your last sentence, but starting a discussion is a necessary prerequisite for getting anything done, and thanks to our gutless governor Heath is the only one taking this step.
      
      Log in to Reply
  2. DavidThi808 says:
    
    June 25, 2011 at 7:25 am
    
    I agree with you 100%.
    
    Log in to Reply
    1. sxp151 says:
      
      June 25, 2011 at 7:55 am
      
      Nonconfrontational and no cursing. Also no longer keeps a giant color-coded poster of the Ways David Is Wrong on the wall in the back bedroom.
      
      Log in to Reply
      1. DavidThi808 says:
        
        June 25, 2011 at 6:30 pm
        
        …is always a good sign 🙂
        
        Log in to Reply
Mark G. says:

June 25, 2011 at 4:48 pm

Assuming 101, 60 and 61 tax cuts really would have killed 75,000 jobs, how come Pols does not understand an equal tax increase will kill 75k or more jobs?

Let me guess, everything Dems do is good, and everything R’s do is bad?

Log in to Reply
1. Sir Robin says:
  
  June 25, 2011 at 4:57 pm
  
  What is astounding is that you cannot look at tax level data, tied to a healthy economy and job growth, in historical contexts and see a broader economic truth. This has been discussed many times here on Pols, with significant and irrufutable date, which you just continue to ignore.
  
  Are you just dumb?
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. DavidThi808 says:
    
    June 25, 2011 at 6:32 pm
    
    Is unlike you and me, he’s clearly never run a company. So he has no fucking clue what helps a company grow vs what kills jobs.
    
    Log in to Reply
Mark G. says:

June 25, 2011 at 4:53 pm

Pols is really trying to pull the pols over our eyes with the following paragraph.

Folks, we don’t expect it to become a campaign slogan, but we’ll say it since somebody really needs to: your taxes are not “too high.” They are not “too high” today, and they were not “too high” in 1999 when they were last cut in in the state of Colorado. Just keep this in the back of your mind at all times: any time somebody says that you are paying more taxes, or “too much,” they are lying to you. You are paying lower taxes today, not higher, at almost every level of government–and this is what directly results in our state being continuously forced to make cuts to things like health care and education. Speaking federally, tax cuts are why we have a huge national debt to scare the public into support for budget cuts that otherwise harm their interests.

Some facts would be great. Please include the hidden tax called inflation. Don’t forget the enormous Colorado local burden. Oh yea, please include fees such as faster.

Pols you really have out done yourself. I did not think your Orwellian BS could go any deeper

Log in to Reply
1. Diogenesdemar says:
  
  June 27, 2011 at 12:36 am
  
  less about than economics?
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. Sir Robin says:
    
    June 27, 2011 at 6:45 am
    
    Log in to Reply
ColoMod says:

June 28, 2011 at 3:40 am

Corporate/income taxes and sales taxes would, respectively, be raised from 4.63 to 5 percent and from 2.9 to 3 percent, not the inverse as pols stated:

state sales and income tax rates, going back from 4.63% to 5% and 2.9% to 3% respectively

Although we are relatively paying less in taxes than at any other point in history, I am unconvinced that pols’ statement that “you’re taxes are not too high” is a legitimate argument in battling Republicans on this issue.

An argument can be made that taxes are too high based on the fundamental ideological difference that Democrats and Republicans hold in what the scope of government should be and how much it should support. That’s the real, and difficult, debate that Democrats (or really anyone who gives a damn about moving the state forward) need to win.

(Disclaimer: I completely support initiaitive 25 and Senator Heath’s courage in raising this issue with Coloradans. Bottom line, it needs to be had because a lot of them (us) just don’t really know how bad it is getting, how we got here, and what the solutions are.)

Log in to Reply
1. ArapaGOP says:
  
  June 28, 2011 at 9:07 pm
  
  ColoMod, I applaud you.
  
  But you’re not quite right, Colorado Pols absolutely intended to word it the way they did. They say “going back” in the sense of “going back to 1999,” so they don’t have to say they support increasing taxes!
  
  You have masterfully uncovered the depths of their spin, which is quite good spin I admit. What you have shown is how hard they will try to avoid saying the two words that will destroy Rollie Heath’s initiative: “tax increase.”
  
  You’re also right about Pols’ “you’re not taxed too much” paternalistic arrogance. If we pay lower taxes today than we did before, it’s because the voters have elected representatives and passed initiatives like TABOR to keep them low. The people have told us how much government they want over and over, and arrogant Democrats are the ones who won’t listen!
  
  This is really a brilliant post, even though I obviously cannot agree on support for Initiative 25. In fact, I think you have supplied excellent arguments against it. Thank you!
  
  Log in to Reply
  1. ColoMod says:
    
    June 28, 2011 at 11:40 pm
    
    One reason I support initiative 25 is because yes, I agree with you, the people have the right to have these issues brought to them so that they can decide what kind of Colorado it is they want to live in. If proponents aren’t doing an adequate job of explaining and defending these kinds of measures, well then they have no one to blame but themselves.
    
    Gallagher in ’82 and TABOR in ’92 are two ways that Coloradans have expressed their desire for lower taxes and less government. This is not to say that public opinion doesn’t change, nor that we as citizens don’t have the right to change our minds when we feel the weight of bad policy on our shoulders.
    
    The real question to me here is this (and I know it is taboo): Colorado, are you willing to, yes, raise your taxes in order to invest in the badly deteriorating educational climate in the state, or don’t you care?
    
    I think it is a definite possibility that given all the sweeping cuts to education (elsewhere too but this specifically) in the past few years that Coloradans will decide that they indeed favor a tax, er, revenue increase.
    
    ArapaGOP I appreciate your praise and am glad that I can add to a meaningful discussion.
    
    Log in to Reply