THE ABILITY OF THE CONSERVATIVE propaganda machine to spin reality is amazing.

Last week the Los Angeles Times printed a story about California raising the income tax by lowering the point where each tax bracket begins.

On it's face the article leaves a general impression favorable to conservative talking points, reporting that:

1. The tax board is lowering the point at which each bracket begins.
2. This will result in up to an extra $140 per family.
3. The increase is on top of other increases due to the recent budget deal:
   1. A .25% increase in the income tax,
   2. A cut in the dependent credit,
   3. A 1% rise in state sales tax, and
   4. A near doubling of the vehicle license fee.

It goes on to quote the Republican vice-chair of the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee decrying the fact that the increase takes "more money out of the taxpaying productive sectors and scoops it into the government coffers at a time when taxpayers are already reeling."

It then quotes a tax expert, who says that the increase will affect California's economy by causing taxpayers to pinch pennies.

The net effect of all this, given the current spin context is to:

1. Re-enforce the idea that taxes are bad,
2. Reinforce the idea that Republicans are against taxes, and that "government" (read Democrats) are behind all this, and
3. Leave the impression that the only escape from ever-increasing taxes is to vote for conservatives.

Not one of those claims is true.

Let's take them one at a time. Today I'll start with the first:

Taxes aren't always bad.

It depends on the kind of tax, and how the money is being used.

"No taxes" means no police, no fire department, no roads, no courts, no justice. It means that a thousand and one things we take for granted, and which make the kind of life we lead a possibility, cease to exist.

So let's be honest. We all want taxes, whatever we think in our weaker moments. We all want a functioning infrastructure, a legal system that works, police, fire departments, and even things like Social Security and Medicare. None of those is free.

The real question isn't whether we should have taxes, but what kind of taxes we should have.

We can tax in ways that undermine our economy and hurt the poorest among us the most, or we can tax in ways that are hardly felt by anyone and cause the economy to thrive.

The former system—the one that hurts the poor and the economy—is called "trickle-down" or "voodoo" economics. It tends to be favored by conservatives, for reasons that have nothing to do with its merits, and by the short-sighted wealthy, for reasons that are obvious.

Under voodoo economics, in bad times government balances the budget by cutting services to the poor and middle class and by raising taxes on the poor and middle class.

This allows the wealthy to hold on to their money, makes the poor more desperate and willing to work for less, and undermines the economy since people who have nothing can't very well buy anything.

The other system is called "bubble-up economics" or "progressive taxation". It tends to be favored by progressives, the far-sighted wealthy (like Warren Buffet and Bill Gates Sr.), and anyone who thinks clearly.

Under that system, in bad times we raise taxes a little on the people who benefit the most from the economy, and can most afford the raise—the wealthy. We use the extra income to balance the budget, and to provide the services to the poor and middle class which the bad times make necessary.

This helps the economy, because the poor and middle class are much more likely to spend any of the money they have left after taxes than the rich are, business recovers more quickly, and even the rich end up benefiting.

Next time: How Republicans really feel about taxes...