Example of a Strawman Argument

I always love easy examples of a strawman argument. Today's comes to us from this blog, which I stumbled across today.

So how much easier could the answer be in solving the AMT crisis (or any crisis really)? Just cut the damn AMT out of the Internal Revenue Code and . . . bingo! . . . Americans will start making more money and the federal budget will be balanced.

No one argues that decreasing taxes will  balance the budget alone. Supply side economics argues that when you lower taxes, you increase the amount of money people keep, which in turn, is used to help the economy grow. Which leads to, in the end, higher revenue for the government. Furthermore, when one argues for supply side economics, they usually do so while arguing for spending cuts at the same time. It's a mixture of both that lead to a balanced budget. One cannot work without the other.

But, more importantly, this blogger seems to think that cutting taxes means Americans will start making more money. Does the author believe that it's Washington's money and that if you give someone a $500 tax break, they earn $500 more per year, and thus making more money? That's an astonishing belief system. A little sad, but telling.

 So why isn't the GOP demanding the repeal of the AMT on the ground that the damned tax-and-spend Democrat[ ] Party is once again in the way of progress?

Actually, some senators have been pushing for a repeal of the AMT. Both Republicans and Democrats. Maybe the real question should be is, why aren't Democrats (who currently control congress) pushing for a repeal of the AMT? They chair the House Ways and Means Committee and the Finance Committee. Furthermore, in 2006, the states that had the most victims of the AMT were (PDF link): New Jersey, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Maryland, Massachussetts, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Rhode Island, North Dakota and New York.

So the other question would be - if the AMT is so devastating, why are only 2 of the 20 Senators in the most affected states pushing for it's repeal and co-signed onto most recent legistlation to kill it? I'm going to hazard to guess that most of these 10 states (NE primarily) have 2 Democrat Senators. Why aren't they looking out for their constituency? They are being burdened with an unfair tax that exempts most Americans, right?