On Thursday, October 5th The Economics Roundtable discussed the Bush Tax Cuts. The sole SGA representative was surprised to find a complete lack of interest among economics students in student government and government spending in general. The students in attendance were well prepared and had a lot to say.
Those opposed to ending the cuts said such and action would raise unemployment and increase an already high tax burden on American entrepreneurs. Those for ending the cuts said increased government revenue was vital to reducing the deficit, but many among the round table thought drastic cuts to spending would be a much more effective way to cut the deficit, especially since under the status quo government expenditures are expected to keep increasing.
This disagreement led to a discussion concerning the merits of public spending, and how effective it is at its stated goals of creating employment and alleviating poverty, among other things. Some in attendance thought public spending was necessary to alleviate those that were needy, because otherwise the private sector would leave those unfortunate helpless. Others at the table argued that the cold, faceless way the government “helps” people often creates dependence and a negative incentive for people to improve their own lives. I myself made the argument that government charity discourages individuals to help poor people within their own communities because the state already takes the resources that potentially charitable people would have used to help.
At the end of the discussion, the group returned to the question of deficits and a surprising member of those in attendance believed that reducing the national debt might be impossible. Many of those individuals made points concerning recent actions taken by the Federal Reserve that will likely drastically increase inflation. Everyone in attendance left the roundtable better informed on many issues, happy after hearing a great variety of views on current issues.
