Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 13, 2011 13:01:44 GMT -5
I think it's safe to say that freemoney won't be running for President.
;D
I sympathize with your frustration (even if you and I probably wouldn't agree too much on ideal solutions), but you are talking about political seppuku there.
The only one I've seen who's even DARED to suggest that current participants need to share in Medicare reform is Chris Christie. Probably not a coincidence that he's not running for President either.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 13, 2011 13:02:26 GMT -5
TRA '86 was designed to be revenue neutral. The tax cut for individuals was paired with a tax increase for corporations (and many tax tweaks). As well, the tax cuts were not paired with massive cuts to social programs designed to aid the elderly and the poor, as is Ryan's plan. Approximately two-thirds of Ryan's cuts fall on those least able to afford them.
|
|
|
Post by hoyawatcher on Apr 13, 2011 14:08:17 GMT -5
Anyone that thinks we can balance the budget - or just get reasonably close if you want to follow that line of economics - without significant changes to to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security is undergoing significant pharmacotherapy. That will include both some taxes, and some cuts to the programs. the cuts will be actual cuts, means testing of Medicare as proposed by Ryan's plan, raising of retirement age for SS and others. Just raising taxes on the top 2% of wage earners may make good soundbites for the Prez's currently unengaged/unenthusiastic base but it doesn't work either mathematically or when the realities of the market are engaged. Interesting logic loop regarding corporate taxes. Even Obama agrees that corporations are keeping profits overseas due to the US corporate tax rates being significantly higher than other developed (and undeveloped) countries. So profits are parked overseas and not brought back to the US. But any conversation of cutting corporate taxes to bring the increased revenue back to the US bring cries that these cuts which would bring revenue back to the US in reality would mean trillions in reduced revenue ??
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Apr 13, 2011 14:42:00 GMT -5
The reduction in tax rates, combined with the elimination of certain deductions (the "reform") reduces revenue by almost $1 trillion over the next decade. Oooops! I guess someone IS paying attention afterall.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 13, 2011 15:04:37 GMT -5
Oops, it wasn't you and Oops, I think I'd like to see a little more substantiation before accepting a random assertion and dollar figure as fact. Source please.
Oh, and Oops, you're aware that lowering the corporate tax rate and reforming the corporate tax system is actually a recommendation that came out of the bipartisan debt commission?
No how is it that the estimates based the commission's corporate tax reform proposals talked about adding up to $1 trillion, but the virtually the same reform proposed by Paul Ryan all of the sudden loses $1 trillion (according to whoever said that)?
Curious.
Oh, and Obama just recommended more or less the same thing today.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 13, 2011 15:26:35 GMT -5
So the protector of the lower and middle class proposed doing away with the mortgage interest deduction and the exclusion for employer-provided health insurance and placing limits on itemized deductions?
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Apr 13, 2011 15:32:29 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 13, 2011 16:33:09 GMT -5
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Apr 13, 2011 17:28:31 GMT -5
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Apr 13, 2011 17:40:45 GMT -5
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Apr 13, 2011 17:59:58 GMT -5
Well, one's the senior editor, one's a correspondent. Also, the latter thinks the deficit commission and Paul Ryan were operating at the idiot level--otherwise why would the President, being the third of the group to speak "seriously" about the deficit have to raise the level of discourse? Though, to be fair to the idiots, they offered more specifics (you know, the hard part of deficit reduction) and didn't anger the Pentagon / guarantee a radical change in our role in the world (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110413/pl_afp/useconomypoliticsobamamilitarygates). Also, the thing everyone seems to be forgetting in this Medicare/Medicaid debate is the fact that right now, it really isn't guaranteed health care. Finding a doctor that will take you when you're on Medicare isn't easy and seems to require raising the repayment rates every year.
|
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Apr 13, 2011 18:05:19 GMT -5
You have to be kidding me.
Key Facts About the Path to Prosperity
General:
•Shows absurd number of graphs involving the year 2080
•Postpones all real savings until 2022 – after his election campaign.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 13, 2011 18:37:16 GMT -5
You'd better read the notation at the bottom of this reference.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,443
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Apr 13, 2011 19:09:48 GMT -5
You'd better read the notation at the bottom of this reference. What about it? A bunch of handwaving about closing loopholes with no details satisifies you if it's from a Republican? At least Obama suggested cutting the mortgage interest deduction - try finding anything that bold that raises revenue in Ryan's plan.
|
|
|
Post by hoyawatcher on Apr 13, 2011 21:14:47 GMT -5
You'd better read the notation at the bottom of this reference. What about it? A bunch of handwaving about closing loopholes with no details satisifies you if it's from a Republican? At least Obama suggested cutting the mortgage interest deduction - try finding anything that bold that raises revenue in Ryan's plan. I think means testing Medicare is bolder than a non-starter like cutting mortgage deductions. But delaying any specific budget cutting until after the next election as the Prez proposed and then having some amorphous general cut is not just handwaving but charging at windmills.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,443
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Apr 13, 2011 22:56:42 GMT -5
I think means testing Medicare is bolder than a non-starter like cutting mortgage deductions. But delaying any specific budget cutting until after the next election as the Prez proposed and then having some amorphous general cut is not just handwaving but charging at windmills. Means testing Medicare is not revenue. It's a spending cut. So again, find something that is courageously closing a tax loophole in Ryan's plan - which is supposedly revenue neutral after a bunch of handwaving. But I like that you're crying about specific budget cutting being delayed till 2012 for the sake of politics when you're supporting a plan that delays cutting Medicare for 10 years .... for the sake of politics.
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Apr 14, 2011 8:54:40 GMT -5
Thank you for providing that link, but I don't think it supports your original statement, which was that reducing the corporate tax rate and implementing corporate tax code reform would constitute a net loss of $1 trillion. All this says (as best I can read it) is that if you cut the corporate tax rate alone, that would cost $1 trillion over a decade. But I could be reading it wrong. Again, the tax reform -- and I will absolutely grant that we don't have enough detail on that -- that the debt commission and Ryan have proposed may not be possible to get passed given political considerations, but it's not fair to say that the reform would cost $1 trillion. (On the other hand, it's also not fair to say it would add $1 trillion, which was an estimate I noted earlier). Something tells me though, that if Bowles-Simpson, Rep. Ryan and President Obama all think that lowering the corporate tax rate and reforming the corporate tax code is a good idea, it's probably not going to cost the government in revenue.
|
|
|
Post by hoyawatcher on Apr 14, 2011 9:21:08 GMT -5
I think means testing Medicare is bolder than a non-starter like cutting mortgage deductions. But delaying any specific budget cutting until after the next election as the Prez proposed and then having some amorphous general cut is not just handwaving but charging at windmills. Means testing Medicare is not revenue. It's a spending cut. So again, find something that is courageously closing a tax loophole in Ryan's plan - which is supposedly revenue neutral after a bunch of handwaving. But I like that you're crying about specific budget cutting being delayed till 2012 for the sake of politics when you're supporting a plan that delays cutting Medicare for 10 years .... for the sake of politics. Why is the only thing defined as "courageous" have to be a tax increase? I don't agree with your basic premise here. There are a lot of ways to close the deficit and the Prez's focus on the only concrete short term action being tax increases is foolish. Also FWIW, I am in the cross hairs of Ryan's means testing of Medicare and it sure feels like you just increased my taxes for nothing back to me. If I had my way we would go immediately go back to spending levels pre TARP and pre Stimulus in order to generate a new budget for next year. That would still require gradual changes to Medicare, Medicaid and SS going forward. Ryan comes closest to this and has a real plan attached to it. I'll take it as the most politically palatable starting point I have seen. In many (not all) ways it mimics the Prez's own debt commission. FWIW one way it does mimic the debt commission is in its approach to corporate taxes. Maybe the Gang of 6 will come up with a better way. We'll see. But the Prez's handwaving, windmill charging, stump speech that this is all about taxes is not a serious approach. If he wants to be serious about this and put a real combination of spending cuts, entitlement reform and taxes on the table I am happy to listen. If he wants to simply send raw meat to the furthest left elements of his base I will be happy to watch his numbers continue to plunge with "moderates" and wait for the results of 2012. Recognizing the time between now and then will be really ugly.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,443
Member is Online
|
Post by TC on Apr 14, 2011 11:06:48 GMT -5
Why is the only thing defined as "courageous" have to be a tax increase? Well, mostly because Republicans disapprove of tax increases and it would be courageous of a Republican to suggest something that unpopular but necessary. Cuts to Medicare which don't hit anyone on Medicare or anyone who will be on Medicare in the next ten years aren't courageous - it's just a brazen political maneuver to shut down the program - not a deficit plan. But the issue is that we were talking about the $1T revenue decrease, to which Ed brought up the disclaimer at the bottom that the measures to broaden the tax base were not included because there isn't any detail on them (i.e. handwaving). Ed is implying it invalidates the data, while most people would argue that it is a sign that Ryan's plan doesn't take revenue seriously.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Apr 14, 2011 11:41:00 GMT -5
TC, I never said it invalidated the data. What my comment was intended to say is why not read the entire table, including the notation at the bottom that says, in effect, the data are not complete. Posting incomplete data can be misleading, to use a mild word.
|
|