Gary North on current economic affairs and investment marketsGary North -- Specific Answers
HomeContact MeTell a FriendText SizeSearchMember Area
Gain immediate access to all of our current articles, the question-and-answer forums, dozens of free books, and article archives. Click here for details on how to join.

About This Site
Academic Gaps
Articles
Capitalism and the Bible
Clichés of Protectionism
College Finances
Debt Management
Ellen Brown: Critique
Federal Reserve Charts
Gary North's Free Books
Get Published Here!
Gold Price & My Report
Keynes Project
Price Index (U.S.A.)
Questions for Jim Wallis
Remnant Review
Social Security/Medicare
Sustained Revival
Tea Party Economist
U.S. Debt Clock
Yield Curve
Your YouTube Channel
Gary North's Miscellany
Advertising
Blogging
Budgeting for Wealth
Business Start-Up
Career Advancement
Digital Tools
Education That Works
Evernote: Free Notes
Federal Reserve Policy
Fireproof Your Job
Goal-Setting for Success
Great Default
Inheritance Strategies
Insurance
International Investing
Investment Basics
Job and Calling
Keynesian Economics
Leadership
Marketing Case Studies
Obamanomics
Precious Metals
Real Estate
Retirement
Safe Places
State of the Economy
Stocks and Bonds
Study Habits
Video Channel Profits
Members' Free Manuals
Our Products
Contact Me
Help
Tell a Friend
Text Size
Your Account
My 100% Guarantee
Privacy Policy
Terms of Use


This site powered by MemberGate
home | Tea Party Economist | Are The Billionaire Koch Brothers Ec . . .
 

Are The Billionaire Koch Brothers Economic Imbeciles? The Cato Institute Proposes a Test.

Gary North
Printer-Friendly Format

Dec. 18, 2012

A senior fellow at the Cato Institute has written a remarkable article. It implies that the Koch brothers, who are the main source of funding for Cato, are a pair of economic ignoramuses. (Note: "ignorami" is acceptable, if you're a pedant.) It was published in the Wall Street Journal's December 14 online edition and in a special insert in the December 17 printed edition.

The insert asked: "Should We End the Tax Deduction for Charitable Contributions?" Dr. Daniel Mitchell, an economist, answered "yes."

His argumentation is nothing if not unique. Let me take you through it.

For all the praise it gets, there's just no evidence that the tax break leads people to increase their giving--but it does lead them to make bad choices about giving. What's more, it favors a segment of the public, the very wealthy, that can afford to give without a break. And cutting the deduction does a lot less economic harm than other ways of raising tax revenue.

Dr. Mitchell is a great believer in evidence. As we shall see, he cares not a fig for economic theory. Evidence is king.

Why do I say that he cares nothing for economic theory? Because he denies the fundamental premise of all free market economic theory: "At a higher price, less is demanded." He says that charitable giving remains at 2% of gross income, no matter what the policy. This is his evidence.

He relies on the undefined concept of "need." This word is not used by free market economists. This is because they see behavior as modified at the margin. There are wants. Besides the basics of life, there are no needs.

Upper-income households are the biggest beneficiaries of the deduction, with those making more than $100,000 per year taking 81% of the deduction even though they account for just 13.5% of all U.S. tax returns.

The data are even more skewed for households with more than $200,000 of income. They account for fewer than 3% of all tax returns, yet they take 55% of all charitable deductions.

His argument is clear: marginal tax rates have no effect on giving. None.

Let's think about this claim. At a top bracket rate of 36%, for every dollar donated, Uncle Sam leaves 36 cents on the table. Mitchell says that it will not affect giving by adding 36% to the cost of giving by the rich.

In short, all modern economic theory is wrong. At 36% more costly, the same amount of charitable giving will occur.

Put differently, price is irrelevant to the rich. He is quite open about this.

These are people who can not only afford to give up the tax break, they would very likely give to charity without the deduction. They would still face tremendous cultural pressure to write charitable checks, as well as the prompting of their own conscience. Besides, many of them would still get nice perks for doing good--like seats at the opera or buildings named after them.

To understand the logic of this argument, I offer this annual fund-raising letter from Cato to the Koch Brothers.

David and Charles Koch
Somewhere, USA

Dear David and Charles:

Enclosed is a copy of a recent article by one of our fellows. It argues that rich people are economic ignoramuses. They do not respond to price changes. It states emphatically that if you and your peers have the tax deduction removed, you will still give as much money as before.

So, if the deduction is removed, as Dr. Mitchell recommends, we here at Cato expect that you will still send us as much money as you did before the deduction was removed.

Actually, we will need a bit more. Donors who are not fat cats like you will probably cut back on their giving. They respond to price changes. But you two won't. Dr. Mitchell has the evidence. You don't want to argue with evidence. That's what scientific economics is all about. We here at Cato are nothing if not scientific.

Just to show that we are confident that you will still send as much money as before, we are tossing in some opera tickets.

Sincerely yours, The Cato Fund-Raising Staff

I would like to see the Kochs' response.


Printer-Friendly Format

 Tip of the Week
Sign up for my free
Tip of the Week
Verification Characters:    Type     C  U  4  A  4     here   


Tip of the week archives
On what this icon
means, and how it
can help you,
click here
 Q & A Forums
General Q&A Forum
Advertising and Resumés
Affiliates
American History Topics
Backyard Food Gardening
Banking and Politics
Blog Sites and Web Sites
Books Worth Reading
Bumper Sticker Slogans
Business Forum
Buying Smart
Christian Service Forum
College -- The Cheap Way
Copywriting
Education Alternatives
Food Storage
For Women Only
Fukushima
GNC Benefits
GNC Testimonials
Gold and Silver
Great Default Forum
Health and Diet
Health Insurance
Homeschooling
Investments Forum
Iran War
Job, Calling, and Career
Leadership Development
Legacy Building
Less Dependent Living
Local Political Action
Non-Retirement Forum
One Good Idea
Police State
Privacy
Public Speaking
Real Estate Forum
Remnant Review Forum
Safe Places Forum
Taxation Policy
Typographical Errors
Video Production Basics

 Archives
Reality Check
 Discussion Forum
Search Discussion


Recent Forum Posts
• Search tool to evaluate mutual funds?
• If DGN had 1 Billion Dollars
• Why is the Dollar Rising?
• Investing in Russia? If so, how?
• How to invest in oil
• ETF Shorts
• INVESTING IN TAX LIENS
• monetary deceleration will bring a bust
• Sell some Mineral Rights?
• Amazon versus Walmart
• why do you say public stock investors are doomed?
• silver purchase
• My grandparents are retired with 220k
• Probate Investing
• Gold Purchase
• The Big Winner in the Rental Home Shortage: Wall S
• Cuba good or bad for Florida real estate?
• Two good RE websites plus a bonus
• John Schaub's books
• Corporate structure
• Winona WI limits rental housing.
• Property Management System (SaaS)
• Marijuana and landlording
• Buying from Dad with seller financing?
• Townhomes as Rentals
• Tenant causing civil forfeiture...
• INVESTING IN TAX LIENS
• Rental Strategy
• Foundation Issues
• Any idea how to market a property to Chinese?
• New Hampshire and Florida
• Ecuador and PR
• Survivor library
• Missle Silo converted to Condos
• Does the South suck?
• Moving TO the US?
• No City for Old People
• Will you die getting to your bug out location?
• teaching English overseas - some questions
• The state with the most Liberty
• Switzerland and Firearms
• On "Zip Code Searching On The Web"
• Crash Course in becoming an Expat
• Anyone tried Puerto Rico?
• Chattanooga, Tennessee
• Sudden Wealth Advice
• Sudden Wealth Advice
• Question on Traditional Pensions
• advice on how do I interact with my older parents?
• Do You Sincerely Want to Be Rich? Why?
• Req. For No 401(k)/Other Pensions via Relocatio
• Cashing out 401K to pay student debt?
• SS @ 62 and still working
• Desolation or Prosperity?
• I take it Retirement Armageddon is not available
• Post Retirement Career
• Social Security - when to start collecting
• 401K Risk
• Detroit Retirees Fight 83% Health Care Cut
• Lump Sum Early DROP
• Student loan payment responsibility
• 40 or 50 years from now
• Really easy weight loss
• What happened to Jim Sinclair?
• Net Worth Question
• North Korea
• If I Had A Billion Dollars
• Negotiating
• What happened to David Walker?
• Thrift Habits, Race, and Net Worth correction
• Social transformation
• Canada
• Define a Conservative Foreign Policy
• Kucinich describes what Unanimous consent means
• Who Will Write The Checks?
• 30 day refund required by law (online purchases)?
• Home based travel agency
• New EU VAT collection rules
• Working on USP for Podcast
• Should I Advertise Here?
• Initial Price - Rule of Thumb
• Janitorial business start up
• Targeted market research?
• Product or service
• Food Service Start Up
• I've been encouraged to start two side businesses
• book keeping as a home based career?
• book on getting organized
• how to decide on a price for my subscription site?
• HP plans to make 3-D printing everyday thing