A Paul Krugman commentary on the deficit "crisis", and mirrors the Rachael Maddow clip we sent out yesterday.
Why haven't the media given any attention to the Progressive Caucus budget proposal?
An excellent column, as always......
When I listen to current discussions of the federal budget, the message I hear sounds like this: We’re in crisis! We must take drastic action immediately! And we must keep taxes low, if not actually cut them further!
You have to wonder: If things are that serious, shouldn’t we be raising taxes, not cutting them?
My description of the budget debate is in no way an exaggeration. Consider the Ryan budget proposal, which all the Very Serious People assured us was courageous and important. That proposal begins by warning that “a major debt crisis is inevitable” unless we confront the deficit. It then calls, not for tax increases, but for tax cuts, with taxes on the wealthy falling to their lowest level since 1931.
And because of those large tax cuts, the only way the Ryan proposal can even claim to reduce the deficit is through savage cuts in spending, mainly falling on the poor and vulnerable. (A realistic assessment suggests that the proposal would actually increase the deficit.)
President Obama’s proposal is a lot better. At least it calls for raising taxes on high incomes back to Clinton-era levels. But it preserves the rest of the Bush tax cuts — cuts that were originally sold as a way to dispose of a large budget surplus. And, as a result, it still relies heavily on spending cuts, even as it falls short of actually balancing the budget.
So why isn’t someone offering a proposal reflecting the reality that the Bush tax cuts were a huge mistake, and suggesting that increased revenue play a major role in deficit reduction? Actually, someone is — and I’ll get to that in a moment. First, though, let’s talk about the current state of American taxes.
From the tone of much budget discussion, you might think that we were groaning under crushing, unprecedented levels of taxation. The reality is that effective federal tax rates at every level of income have fallen significantly over the past 30 years, especially at the top. And, over all, U.S. taxes are much lower as a percentage of national income than taxes in most other wealthy nations.
The point is that we aren’t that heavily taxed, either by historical standards or in comparison with other nations. So if you’re truly horrified by the budget deficit, why not propose tax increases as part of the solution?
Wait, there’s more. The core of the Ryan proposal is a plan to privatize and defund Medicare. Yet this would do nothing to reduce the deficit over the next 10 years, which is why all the near-term deficit reduction comes from brutal reductions in aid to the needy and unspecified cuts in discretionary spending. Tax increases, by contrast, can be fast-acting remedies for red ink.
And that’s why the only major budget proposal out there offering a plausible path to balancing the budget is the one that includes significant tax increases:the “People’s Budget” from the Congressional Progressive Caucus, which — unlike the Ryan plan, which was just right-wing orthodoxy with an added dose of magical thinking — is genuinely courageous because it calls for shared sacrifice.
True, it increases revenue partly by imposing substantially higher taxes on the wealthy, which is popular everywhere except inside the Beltway. But it also calls for a rise in the Social Security cap, significantly raising taxes on around 6 percent of workers. And, by rescinding many of the Bush tax cuts, not just those affecting top incomes, it would modestly raise taxes even on middle-income families.
All of this, combined with spending cuts mostly focused on defense, is projected to yield a balanced budget by 2021. And the proposal achieves this without dismantling the legacy of the New Deal, which gave us Social Security, and the Great Society, which gave us Medicare and Medicaid.
But if the progressive proposal has all these virtues, why isn’t it getting anywhere near as much attention as the much less serious Ryan proposal? It’s true that it has no chance of becoming law anytime soon. But that’s equally true of the Ryan proposal.
The answer, I’m sorry to say, is the insincerity of many if not most self-proclaimed deficit hawks. To the extent that they care about the deficit at all, it takes second place to their desire to do precisely what the People’s Budget avoids doing, namely, tear up our current social contract, turning the clock back 80 years under the guise of necessity. They don’t want to be told that such a radical turn to the right is not, in fact, necessary.
But, it isn’t, as the progressive budget proposal shows. We do need to bring the deficit down, although we aren’t facing an immediate crisis. How we go about stemming the tide of red ink is, however, a choice — and by making tax increases part of the solution, we can avoid savaging the poor and undermining the security of the middle class.
Ironic isn't it. What was once an egalitarian vacation is now mirroring our society, and the top 5% [who buy the suites on the biggest ships] now have separate enclaves so they can use the facilities, shows and entertainment of the monsters but can avoid the middle class hoi polloi.....
Port of Miami
On a recent Saturday afternoon onboard the Norwegian Epic cruise ship, Dennis and Julie Solet peered into a luxurious lounge outfitted with velvet couches and gauzy curtains. But after the Solets told an employee they weren't staying in a suite, the couple was turned away. The lounge, a small sign said, was reserved "for suite guests only."
"Money has its privileges," said Mr. Solet, a 62-year-old retired teacher from Windsor, Ontario. "One day we'll be suite people."
There is a new cruise ship class system. A growing number of cruise lines have built lavish—and separate—cocoons for their biggest spenders. It is a departure from the egalitarianism that had reigned on most ships for the last several decades when everyone from those staying in the humblest inside stateroom to those in the most luxurious suite would rub elbows in the same bars, dining rooms and pool decks. In a way, the trend is a throwback to the heyday of trans-Atlantic crossings in the 1920s, when first-, second- and third-class passengers were assigned separate areas of vessels. (Though no one would mistake today's cheapest stateroom for the gloomy steerage dorms of centuries past.)
Shaken Manchild syndrome - some advice on how to deal with your indolent manchild from Onion News....with an appeal from Ben Stiller at the end......2 minutes...
Political Junkie story - how the Republicans used a little-known maneuver to successfully derail Democratic legislation in the 2008-2010 period, and how the Dems are unable to make this work in this session due to the iron discipline of the Republicans.....
WASHINGTON — A year ago, when Republicans were in the minority on Capitol Hill, they drove Democrats crazy by using an obscure parliamentary maneuver to change, delay and even kill Democratic priorities.
Now that Republicans are running the House, Democrats have tried to stymie the GOP agenda by relying on the tactic, known as the motion to recommit. But they've failed on every one of their 23 attempts this year.
That motion is almost always the last step just before the final vote on a bill. It gives the minority party, which has little voice and few rights in the House, a last chance to amend a bill, or in a more traditional sense, return it to the committee level for further work.
Often, the maneuver is aimed at forcing members of the majority into an untenable choice between opposing their party's position or casting a vote that opponents could use against them in election campaigns.
For a recommit motion to work, the minority party must pick off at least some members of the majority. Thus Democrats would need at least a few dozen of the House's 241 Republicans to vote with them this year. Their best showing so far on any motion: two GOP votes.
Republican leaders may have a hard time keeping their troops in line on the budget and social issues, but there's near ironclad unity when it comes to keeping Democrats in their place.
Here's a new video - "Big Mike breaks down the deficit". If you have a conservative old uncle that's spouting the Fox talking points, send him this 3 minute plain talkin' video. Pretty clear.....
Remember the Westboro Baptist Church? The evil "Christians" that demonstrate at
soldiers funerals, saying it's gods punishment for homosexuality? Yes, them......well
they tried a demo at a dead marine's funeral in Mississippi.....and probably won't again.
Not an important story, but very satisfying......justice, Southern style.....
There’s a misguided Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan., whose members have a flair for protesting military funerals, spewing hatred and venom, but I’ll bet a dollar to a dime the followers of the Westboro Baptist Church think twice about venturing into the state of Mississippi again with their circus.
It seems last Saturday Staff Sgt. Jason Rogers, who was killed in Afghanistan on April 7, was buried in his hometown of Brandon, which is a small town in Rankin County, located in the center of the state. And, as is their habit, a crowd of Westboro followers loudly announced they would drive down to take their dubious part.
It seems last Saturday Staff Sgt. Jason Rogers, who was killed in Afghanistan on April 7, was buried in his hometown of Brandon, which is a small town in Rankin County, located in the center of the state. And, as is their habit, a crowd of Westboro followers loudly announced they would drive down to take their dubious part.
Remember Susan Boyle? They are trying to say this fellow on Britain's Got Talent will be the next sensation.......we report, you decide.......4 minutes....
I have often wondered how the mini-casino "Internet Cafe"s" stay in business [like the one at the Triangle in Mount Dora], because it isn't legal.....well now we know.
It's politics, smart lawyers and lots of lobbying. And they are here to stay, because with the money they are spending on lobbying it has never been as easy [or as cheap] to buy a Florida politician to vote in their favour.
A most interesting article from Business Week on the latest scam relieving the poor of their money, and it's the poor that they target. Not you.
Two interesting factoids as well.......these casinos take the welfare card you get with food stamps, supposedly because when you buy credits they give you a junk snack to munch on [obesity?].....so all the State has to do is to say these cards can't be used for casino time. Will this happen? Not under the Rick Scott Florida regime.....
The second is even more infuriating - these casinos are set up as charities, because allegedly part of the proceeds goes to needy people and/or veterans [yeah right].....so they pay no taxes. Amazing.......
Inside a one-story building on the edge of a strip mall in Central Florida, Joy Baker calculates the sum total of her morning bets. It's almost noon, and she's down $5. Not bad. Her husband, Tony, sits a few feet away. "This is the most fun we've had in 20 years," says Joy, who is 78 and retired. "At our age, we can't hike. You can't pay him to go to the movies. This gives us a reason to get up in the morning."
Tony concurs. "We enjoy this," he says. "We will be very bitter if the politicians take this away from us. I will take it personally."
It's a Wednesday morning in mid-March, and the Bakers are sitting inside Jacks, a new type of neighborhood business that is flourishing in shopping malls throughout Florida—and across America. Jacks bills itself as a "Business Center and Internet Cafe," but it looks more like a pop-up casino.
Todays dating video - Wine Opener....
Todays medical joke
No comments:
Post a Comment