ALN provided a simplified plus-minus tax cut or tax increase, elevated government spending or reduced expenditures analyses in the U.S. political landscape covering the pre- and post-World War period (85; 94-5) as much as Bill Clinton’s term as U.S. President (109). ALN’s ‘When Legislators Get Out of Step’ or Chapter 6 in the book ‘Title’ attempted to explain the fiscal policy changes in the United States when it comes to constituent preferences on fiscal policy issues; the speed or slowness of legislator actions, inactions, or stances; and constituent-legislator equilibrium or interest-and-action matching from a land of non-equilibrium (92).
Meanwhile, ALN’s ‘Key Episodes in the Twentieth Century’ or Chapter 7 with the exact same book attempted to discuss the drawn out method of fiscal policy change initiatives (110). Chapter 6 basically said how U.S. political representatives identify, understand, and help the majority while Chapter 7 detailed the U.S. Economy’s shift from agricultural to industrial as well as the corresponding improve in government spending to help denser population growth within the cities during the pre-World War U.S. economy (94-6). Chapter 7 also advised that “voters became much more conservative” and legislators “made an ‘honest mistake’” (110) during the later component from the twentieth century as the reasons behind the slow, yet ultimately, quick trend in tax cuts, and hence, reduced government spending (100-5). The thesis of this paper is that when it came to fiscal policy preferences, U.S. constituent mood swings from conservative to liberal or vice-versa truly reflected a major transformation in the U.S. economy that ALN reasonably examined in Chapter 6 (90-1) and some parts of Chapter 7 (94-7), but failed to identify or assist in Chapter 7’s conclusion with regards to the later part of the twentieth century (110).
First, ALN noticed that U.S. government spending was increased within the early twentieth century but was cut or reduced during the last three decades (83). ALN also observed that some U.S. states followed this trend while others did not (83). ALN named people states that followed the trend as ‘initiative states’ while those people states that did not follow the trend as ‘non-initiative states’ (83). Majority of ALN’s observations and analyses are focused on fiscal policies that improve or reduce spending or taxes versus those policies that maintain the popularity quo. ALN pointed out that legislators or politicians that followed the trend are clearly the representatives with the majority whilst individuals that did not: “voted in accordance with their conscience” believing that they know better than the majority (87). In this light, ALN asserted that: “After all, representatives who wish to stay in office will try to please their constituents, and people who flagrantly ignore the wishes with the electorate will eventually be voted out of office” (87). ALN also provided many examples on how government spending increased during the U.S. economy’s shift from the agricultural era into the industrial age as the rural economy became weak even though the urban economy became strong (94-7). Moreover, ALN cited as an illustration voters’ preference for elevated welfare spending during a recession rather than during an economic boom (90). ALN’s examples appeared for getting economic explanations, and dovetailed with Roosevelt’s New Deal and spending economics to pump prime a sluggish U.S. economy during the Good Depression, except in ALN’s discussion in the California Tax Revolt (100; 102-5), Ronald Reagan (102-3; 106; 108-9), and Bill Clinton (109). Here, initiatives for tax cuts were merely presented and said as constituency preferences or setting about “to implement the will with the voters” (103).
Second, Chapter 6 or ‘When Legislators Get Out of Step’ provided insights on how legislators deliberately or unwittingly interpret or misinterpret voters’ preferences on specific issues that affect the speed by which fiscal policies alter and vice-versa. Meaning, voters too can misinterpret the stances on fiscal policy problems of their duly elected representatives. Each ways, misinterpretations are due to several factors this kind of as: [a] the different portfolio of difficulties that a politician supports or info overload (88); [b] the very good number of politicians that ought to be elected in federal, state, and local government offices (88); [c] the distinct interests of politicians compared with ordinary citizens (87); [d] limited facts (89); and [e] lack of measurement tools that gauge voter preferences on certain difficulties (89). Based on ALN, these causes determine the speed or slowness of a politician to adapt to a fiscal policy alter how the majority of constituents prefer. Ultimately, the politician catches up on the preference of the voting majority. Otherwise, politicians get voted out of office. Meanwhile, Chapter 7 or ‘Key Episodes in the Twentieth Century’ provided an insight into how a visionary initiates the program of fiscal policy adjust (102), that the initiative slowly gains momentum (102), and how the initiative affects the majority on the voters eventually resulting in a fiscal policy change (103-5). However, ALN’s discussion in the slow fiscal policy change did not refer to any economic explanations whilst the time period graphically shown in Figure 7.3 illustrating the growth of support for tax cuts from 1968 to 1979 in California (104) can also be dovetailed with major economic events that occurred during this time including the oil crisis from the 1970s; the emerging trend in Japanese car imports; or the beginnings of offshore manufacturing plants. Essentially, the slow achieve in momentum from the California tax cut that was initiated by Philip Watson could also be attributed to lack of information, each inside issue of view of politicians and also the voting constituency of California State. This really is for the easy reason that: Watson may well have have been just before his time. For ones functionality of this paper, it's conjectured that Watson might have had seen, evaluated, or assessed economic events that had been unfolding during his time that eventually resulted inside trend of tax cuts and reduced federal government spending. For instance, U.S. customer preference for far more fuel-efficient and cheaper Japanese cars could have had a certain externality that politicians would initially favor for the sake with the bigger majority of consumers. However, the same situation includes a adverse externality from the sense that U.S. car manufacturing jobs will likely be greatly affected once demand for Japanese cars rise while people for US-made cars plunge. As a result of the multiplier outcomes in the US automotive market over a US economy, tax cuts would basically counter the side outcomes of cheaper, Japanese automotive solutions this sort of as: [a] lost jobs from direct and indirect automotive marketplace businesses; [b] lesser US worker and corporation money as a result of international competition; and [c] lesser demand for other US items due to reduced purchasing power of US workers and businesses. Over a contrary, mainly because tax cuts would basically reduce federal government spending as a result of lesser federal government funds, major US businesses and US workers could possibly be negatively affected by these tax cuts. Lead to and effect-wise, politicians initially favoring the preference from the majority of shoppers could eventually be creating a disfavor towards majority of constituents who have had lost jobs and reduced income. In this sense, ALN appeared to have had ignored the lead to and effects brought about by the economic externalities over a US political landscape.
Ordercustompaper.com is a professional essay writing service at which you can buy essays on any topics and disciplines! All custom essays are written by professional writers!
No comments:
Post a Comment