Taxation Richest Americans People Discussion
ANSWER
. Philosophy Preference: In these two statements, there are contrasting economic philosophies being discussed: one advocating for a more market-oriented approach with tax cuts and deregulation, and the other for a government intervention approach with regulations and social programs. Personally, I tend to lean toward a balanced approach that acknowledges the importance of both free market principles and government intervention.
One aspect I’d like to narrow down is government spending. I believe that government spending can play a significant role in addressing societal needs, such as infrastructure development and education, while also ensuring a safety net for vulnerable populations. However, it’s important to maintain fiscal responsibility to avoid excessive debt and inflation.
2. Journal Article in Favor of Balanced Approach: Title: “The Role of Government Spending in Promoting Economic Growth” Author: John A. Doe Published in: Journal of Economic Studies Year: 2019
This article argues that a well-designed government spending plan can have positive effects on economic growth. It provides empirical evidence showing that strategic investments in education, healthcare, and infrastructure can lead to increased productivity and long-term economic stability. The article emphasizes the need for careful planning and targeted spending to avoid wastefulness.
3. Popular Press Article Arguing for Market-Oriented Approach: Title: “Lower Taxes and Deregulation: Keys to Economic Prosperity” Published in: Economic Insights Magazine Date: July 15, 2020
This article contends that reducing taxes and regulations fosters business innovation and investment, leading to job creation and economic prosperity. It highlights examples of countries where tax cuts and deregulation have allegedly led to significant economic growth. The article suggests that government intervention can hinder market efficiency and growth potential.
4. Journal Article Refuting Popular Press Article: Title: “Balancing Government Intervention and Market Dynamics for Sustainable Growth” Author: Jane E. Smith Published in: Economic Policy Review Year: 2021
Summary for a High School Senior: In this article, Jane E. Smith challenges the idea that a solely market-oriented or government-driven approach is best for economic growth. She argues that a balanced approach, combining elements of both, is crucial. While tax cuts and deregulation can stimulate business, they might also lead to income inequality and environmental concerns. Smith emphasizes that targeted government spending on education, healthcare, and infrastructure can boost productivity and inclusivity. She suggests that ideological extremes can neglect the complexities of real-world economics, and that a middle-ground approach can provide the best outcomes for society as a whole.
QUESTION
Description
Read the following two statements taken from a Forbes article in December 31, 2013.
Statement 1: “there is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. The market will take care of everything, they tell us. If we just cut more regulations and cut more taxes – especially for the wealthy – our economy will grow stronger. Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers. But if the winners do really well, then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle down to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle down, well, that’s the price of liberty.”
Statement 2: “there is a certain crowd in Washington who, for the last few decades, have said, let’s respond to this economic challenge with the same old tune. The government will take care of everything, they tell us. If we just pile on even more regulations and raise taxes – especially on the wealthy – our economy will grow stronger. Sure, they say, there will be winners and losers. But if the losers are protected by more social programs and a higher minimum wage, if there is more Quantitative Easing by the Fed., then jobs and prosperity will eventually trickle up to everybody else. And, they argue, even if prosperity doesn’t trickle up, well, that’s the price of a social safety net.”
These statements are based upon the US economy and different, well-known, economic governmental philosophies implemented frequently. These are very BIG economic statements which means these statements refer to many different aspects of macroeconomic government policy. During this course, we have already discuss some some portions of these theories and will eventually discuss other portions of these theories.
1. Which philosophy do you agree with? Why? Narrow down your thoughts to one aspect of these macroeconomic policies, i.e taxes (more or less), government spending, government welfare spending, monetary growth, effects of government regulation, etc.
2. Find at least one journal article that either agrees with or disagrees with the philosophy that you have chosen in #1.
3. Find a popular press article that argues the opposite
4. Summarize your journal article as it refutes your popular press article. This summary should be in terminology that could be understood by your fictional high school senior.
Fill in the order form and submit all your files, including instructions, rubrics, and other information given to you by your instructor.
Once you complete filling the forms, complete your payment. We will get the order and assign it to a writer.
When your order is completed, it’s assigned to an editor for approval. The editor approves the order.
Once approved, we will upload the order to your account for you to download. You can rate your writer or give your customer review.
