Budget Negotiations Sample Essay

• Topics: Negotiations
• Pages: 3
• Words: 638
• Date added: June 4, 2020

In the middle of the current funds discussions, there is one ignored question worth asking: what does the community really want? Tax cuts? Shelling out down the nationwide debt? More spending? If so, more investing on what? The available polling data, examined in this report, helps answer these questions. Does the community want to cut taxes? All else equivalent, of course the community wants tax reduces. But in real life, all else is generally not equivalent — reducing taxation involves giving up something else that might be done with the national resources.

When the tradeoffs are made specific, reducing taxation does not stand up so well. Take, for example, a choice between tax reduces and investing the extra on building up Medical wellness insurance or Public Protection. According to a April 1999 Fox News study, 65% of the community wants financing Medical wellness insurance while only 25% would select tax reduces. The feeling on Public Protection vs. tax reduces is even more lopsided: a September 1999 CNN/Time study found 74% wanting to use the funds extra to strengthen Public Protection, when in comparison to just 21% who recommended a tax cut. Even if Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance are taken off the table, the community still finds other uses of the extra more powerful than tax reduces.

In a September 1999 NBC/Wall Street Publication study, 55% of the community recommended using that part of the extra not dedicated to Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance for unmet needs, like knowledge, medical proper care, and nationwide immunity. Just 34% said they would award themselves a tax cut. Even more impressive, though, was that 69% of the community believed that, once Public Protection was taken proper proper, additional charges should be spent on knowledge, the surroundings, medical proper care, crime-fighting, and army immunity, when in comparison to only 22% who believed that a tax cut was the proper use of the money (July 1999 Pew Middle survey).

Does the community want to pay down the debt? While the community considers reducing the nationwide financial debts are a deserving goal, when it is placed against other uses of the extra, the community doesn’t give it a high priority. For example, a Jan 1999 Pew Middle study requested people to select among four uses of the surplus: reducing the debts, tax reduces, investing on household applications such as wellness and knowledge, and making Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance financially sound.The result: a significant 50% of the participants select helping Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance, 21% select household applications, 14% select tax reduces, and only 12% select reducing the debts. Similarly, a Feb 1999 CBS/New York Times study requested the community whether they recommended reducing taxation, reducing the debts, or preserving Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance as uses of the extra. A definite 64% selected Public Protection and Medical wellness insurance, and only 14% indicated interest in reducing the debts. And reducing taxation – consistent with the discussion above – brought up the rear with a little 12%.

Does the community want more spending? In a term, yes. Indeed, the only perspective in which they don’t want more investing is when govt applications are put forward in a hazy and unspecified way as a use for the extra. This is nicely shown by a September 1999 Pew Middle study that requested the community what they wanted to see done with the portion of the extra not used to coast up the Public Protection system. Did they want to see it devoted to a tax cut or to financing new (unspecified) govt programs? By a wide 60% to 25% edge, the community announced themselves in favor of a tax cut. However, the same study requested participants whether they recommended a tax cut or investing on applications for, specifically, knowledge, the surroundings, medical proper care, crime-fighting, and army immunity. The result: by an frustrating 69% the community recommended spending; only 29% recommended tax cuts