It's 2011 all over again. House Republicans are once more threatening to force the country into default by not raising the government's debt ceiling. Markets are beginning to get nervous with default only a week away. Fidelity, the country's largest manger of money market funds, has sold off all its government debt maturing in late October and early November.
Unlike 2011, the government is shut down, throwing hundreds of thousands of government workers out of work and reducing gross domestic product by billions of dollars. On the good side, President Obama so far has refused to negotiate over the shutdown or the debt ceiling. Of course, he is haunted by his unforced error of negotiating in 2011, giving us the sequester that even a "clean" continuing budget resolution won't fix.
What we see is the Republican usurping governance of the country by making the nation ungovernable if their demands are not met. They lost the Presidency in 2012, they lost Senate seats, they got fewer votes in the House of Representatives than the Democrats did, but with brilliant gerrymandering they still have a House majority.
Amazingly, the Republicans no longer even seem to know what they want for their hostage-taking. At first it was clear, they wanted Obamacare repealed/defunded/delayed. Now, it appears they just want budget cuts, preferably to Social Security and Medicare. Inadequate as those programs are, they are still central to middle class economic security. We can't give them up.
I'm back to where I can't turn on the TV. I live in fear the President will cave as he did in 2011. But what will it take to actually end the crisis? I'm guessing a huge stock market drop will be required. And I think that's exactly what will happen. What do you think?
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Thursday, October 10, 2013
Thursday, October 4, 2012
Romney Tax Plan as Budget Busting as Ever
Seriously, I could just re-post my February 27th post word for word tonight and it would be just as true as it was then. The Romney tax plan blows a $5 trillion hole in the budget via tax reductions and he still hasn't told us anything about the tax breaks he would get rid of to pay for it, which he has to do because he calls it revenue neutral, as he did again in tonight's debate.
Amazingly, Romney kept denying that his tax reductions reduce revenue by $5 trillion over 10 years when considered by themselves, even accusing the President of lying about it! He kept insisting that his plan was revenue neutral and that he would not adopt a plan that would reduce the share of taxes paid by the rich. Trust him. We have his word on it.* (Apparently, that is how CNN does fact-checking.)
Given his insistence on his proposal's revenue neutrality, let me repeat my 5-step plan, "How to Read a Republican Tax Proposal."
Step 1: Assume revenue neutrality.
Step 2: Look at what income is no longer taxed.
In the Romney plan, according to conservative economist Josh Barro, there is a $1 trillion reduction in corporate income tax, $3 trillion from the 20% reduction in tax rates (again, not 20 percentage points: the top rate falls from 35% to 28%), and $1 trillion from miscellaneous tax reductions, notably abolishing the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Step 3: Determine how much of that income you have.
Step 4: Ask what taxes have to be raised to get to revenue neutrality.
Step 5: Look in the mirror to see who pays them.
That would be the end of the story, except that the Romney budget is also raising military spending by $2 trillion, as the President pointed out in the debate. So that has to be offset, too.
Again, the bottom line is that if we cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations, it will impact the budget elsewhere, in some combination of tax increases on the middle class, program cuts, and deficit increases. Regardless of the spin surrounding it, if a proposal reduces some taxes but doesn't reduce your taxes, you will lose out via these three methods of compensating for the lost revenue.
* If you aren't old enough to remember, this is a reference to a great series of Isuzu car and truck ads featuring "Joe Isuzu," whose signature line was "You have my word on it."
Amazingly, Romney kept denying that his tax reductions reduce revenue by $5 trillion over 10 years when considered by themselves, even accusing the President of lying about it! He kept insisting that his plan was revenue neutral and that he would not adopt a plan that would reduce the share of taxes paid by the rich. Trust him. We have his word on it.* (Apparently, that is how CNN does fact-checking.)
Given his insistence on his proposal's revenue neutrality, let me repeat my 5-step plan, "How to Read a Republican Tax Proposal."
Step 1: Assume revenue neutrality.
Step 2: Look at what income is no longer taxed.
In the Romney plan, according to conservative economist Josh Barro, there is a $1 trillion reduction in corporate income tax, $3 trillion from the 20% reduction in tax rates (again, not 20 percentage points: the top rate falls from 35% to 28%), and $1 trillion from miscellaneous tax reductions, notably abolishing the Alternative Minimum Tax.
Step 3: Determine how much of that income you have.
Step 4: Ask what taxes have to be raised to get to revenue neutrality.
Step 5: Look in the mirror to see who pays them.
That would be the end of the story, except that the Romney budget is also raising military spending by $2 trillion, as the President pointed out in the debate. So that has to be offset, too.
Again, the bottom line is that if we cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations, it will impact the budget elsewhere, in some combination of tax increases on the middle class, program cuts, and deficit increases. Regardless of the spin surrounding it, if a proposal reduces some taxes but doesn't reduce your taxes, you will lose out via these three methods of compensating for the lost revenue.
* If you aren't old enough to remember, this is a reference to a great series of Isuzu car and truck ads featuring "Joe Isuzu," whose signature line was "You have my word on it."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)