LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed chairman Paul Volcker has opinion about the financial crisis that is deeply felt. He wants the wall that separates banks that take in federally insured deposits from the public separated from the risky trading activities of investment banking houses. That would essentially put us back to the situation that existed before Glass Steagall Act of 1933 was revoked in the 1999. The lessons of the thirties apply today. Says Volcker "people say I am old-fashioned and banks can no longer be seaprated from nonbank activity, but that argument brought us back to where we are today." The Obama advisers like Geithner and Summers are close to the bankers- see the links to Geithner and Summers- and believe that extensively regulating the banks would prevent the banks from engaging in risky practices. However as this reporter Louis Uchitelle of the NYT has not pointed out, the problem is that this is more easily said than done. The very fact that there were close ties between Geithner and Summers and the bankers during the Clinton Administration and Geithner as head of the New York Fed under the Bush administration, and the aggressive lobbying by the investment banks like Goldman and others who are now banks to water down any regulation on derivatives trading and on other supervision, can only lead to a situation where neither Volcker's solution or the Obama people's solution is put into effect. THis will only invite another crisis. With the public anger even worse as the bonuses and compensation from trading profits by Goldman and other banks come through cheap money created by the Fed- see links- for the purpose of addressing the financial crisis. Volcker would separate JP Morgan and Bear Stearns trading operations and separate Merrill from BofA, and Goldman would revert from abank holding company to a investment banking house. Volcker believes that the pay on Wall Street "has gotten grotesquely large." Volcker believes that the separation of deposit taking institutions from investment banking would reduce trading profits and consequently automatically reduce these large bonuses. So is Volcker being ignored by the Obama administration, even as his glow helped the Obama people win public support as a better steward of the economy than McCain during the election campaign? During the crisis Volcker headed the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Today he is rarely seen in his Washington office, he talks to administration officials mostly on the phone, at 82 he is not knocking on doors, and the advisory board has been assigned to look at the tax law on overseas corporate profits. Volcker agrees with most of the Obama plan on financial regulation including higher capital requirements and and pay guidelines, but if this is not enacted because of lobbying by bankers then the nation will have the benefit of neither the Volcker Plan or the Obama Plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The problem Jeb Bush faces of how to deal with Donald Trump in the 2015 Republican primaries.

LyrArc Article Gist
CNN reporter Cassie Spodak provides this exceptional report into the minds of New Hampshire Democratic voters who gave Bernie Sanders a 22 percent lead in the New Hampshire Democratic primary over Hillary Clinton. In October 2016 Hillary Clinton has the support of Bernie Sanders against Donald Trump in the U.S. presidential election. She described it as "100 percent support" in television debate. Sanders has appeared with Clinton twice, and campaigned 4 times in New Hampshire, and continually across the country. Younger New Hampshire voters still long for Sanders as their favored candidate. Older voters and some who have been motivated by Sanders to run for local office see the shaping of the Democratic Party platform as a victory for Sanders. Key planks of Sanders, taxes on the wealthy and higher incomes to pay for student tuition, infrastructure, and helping working class families, are now key parts of the Democratic platform. These voters see this as a pragmatic step and are enthusiastic in their support for Hillary Clinton. Overall Clinton now has 87 percent of Democratic voter support in New Hampshire according to a WMUR/UNH poll in mid October 2016, and she is doing well with millenials and independents nationally, a critical bloc of voters for Clinton to show nationwide support. One member of the steering committee for Sanders in New Hampshire named Dudley Dudley, reflects the opinion that has shifted the party to emerge united during and even more so in the final months of the presidential campaign of 2016- she tells the CNN reporter Spodak that she supports Hillary because "of the way she has grown, and stretched," and the way Clinton and Sanders are now campaigning together and working together. Both Clinton and Sanders deserve credit for their extraordinary ability to grow during their campaigns and during the party's way to shape the way forward. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The New York Times editorial says the constitutional option looks better than the recession option, now that huge cuts in spending including Medicare and Social Security are planned in the budget talks between the Republicans and the Obama White House. The Times points to $4 trillion in defict reduction in 10 years, that is being discussed as part of a grand agreement in White House talks. It reminds the Obama White House that it is not likely to win independent voters if unemployment increases as a result. The constitutional option is for the President to to point to the 14th Amendment that the public debt cannot be questioned, in effect saying the debt limit cannot be controlled by Congress as it is today. See the piece by Krugman on the same subject in today's New York Times. Krugman asks why Obama's economic advisors have not cautioned him about the size of the cuts and the potential impact on unemployment in a fragile economy. And he points out that most of the senior economic advisors have left and it may be Obama's political team that is looking for a way to win points with independent voters for next years election....

LyrArc Article Gist
Peter Orszag's role in the healthcare debate and the formulation of health care policy proposals. One proposal of Orszag, who heads the Congressional Budget Office, is to set up a new agency with powers to cut spending and implement changes in Medicare. Says Orszag, "one of the reasons we have such disjointed and skewed incentives is that we have an excessively political process." At a recent meeting with House Democrats, one Congresswoman said her top priority is winning higher payments for oxygen suppliers, and Orszag was taken aback. For years officials have been trying to cut payments to oxygen and medical equipment suppliers, which are said to be inflated. When a new competitive bidding process was set to take effect last year, industry supporters in Congress were able to delay the plan, and these supporters are still fighting to block changes says the WSJ. Here is a 40 year old Orszag, with degrees from Princeton and London School of Economics, who got his early experience in the Clinton adminstration at age 24. He then followed this with a number of policy oriented jobs, ending with appointment to head CBO in 2007. And he faces the whole system of Congressmen from both parties beholden to interests in the healthcare industry, who provide the donations for them to finance their election campaigns. Dan Eggen describes this in the Washington Post, 7/21/2009. Max Baucus of Montana, and to some extent Grassley of Iowa, are senators from both parties who Eggen points out are beholden to the healthcare industry because of large donations they receive from the interests in the healthcare industry. These interests want to see their payments system protected. The further escalation in health care costs, which would make the whole healthcare system unaffordable even as it delivers poor results, can only be prevented by making cost control an exercize that is not influenced by healthcare industry donations. Jackie Calmes describes the huge hurdles in achieving a deficit neutral move to universal health care in the U.S. in the NYT 6/26/2009. See the link. The exchange between Grassley and Orszag on the issue of the $177 billion in savings needed from the payments to health insurers under the Medicare managed care plans- which allow seniors to obtain Medicare coverage outside the government run program -went as follows. These are dubbed overpayments by outside experts and efforts have been made to cut them in Congress. When Mr Grassley raised concerns about the impact of such cuts in a hearing, -and Grassley has opposed the cut for this overpayment to insurers- Orszag responded saying: "I very firmly believe that capitalism is not founded on excessively high subsidies to private firms. This is what this system delivers right now." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Bernie Sanders with 46% of the delegates, 13.4 million votes, 22 states, and many of the young people in the U.S. behind him, told a news reporter at his home in the final sprint two weeks before the election- he plans to see the major planks of the Democratic platform implemented. He said Clinton is progressive on a number of issues, but the platform is more progressive with upward mobility a critical concern. Sanders played a critical role in shaping the platform. He says he opposes someone from Wall Street in positions of Treasury Secretary, Trade Representative, and will make known his views who would be best in these positions, including Attorney General. Sanders is supported in the Senate by Senators Sherrod Brown, Jeff Merkley, and Elizabeth Warren. Warren has campaigned with Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire, and both support minimum wage, women's rights. WIth a win for Democrats in the Senate Sanders will become either the chairman of the Budget Committee, or with his preference chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. His main goal now is to see key economic Cabinet positions that affect upward mobility, intergenerational mobility, which is damaged today for the middle and working class, go to persons who would do the most to improve it.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama tax deal pushes tough decisions on spending into the future. It will put more money in people's pockets and as a result give a short term boost. Experts do not see long term benefits to the economy. It does not do what spending on much needed infrastructure and investment in other parts of the economy would do to give a long term lift to the economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krauthammer says President Obama has failed to come out openly in support of the Bowles-Simpson commission's recommendations on deficit reduction. The recommendations were made in December 2011. The President's February 2011 budget did not take up these recommendations. He gets a sense that there is too much electioneering in the Obama posture on deficit reduction- being in the best position for the 2012 presidential election rather than a sincere effort. He suggests the Republicans pursue a short term debt ceiling hike of $500 billion containing $500 billion in budget cuts by passing this in the House. And couple this with a call to follow the Simpson-Bowles recommendations which, in one option, cut $1.1 trillion of deductions, credits and loopholes while lowering tax rates across the board to a top rate of 23%. This would give enough time to come up with a thoughtful and open effort with public scrutiny, and is preferable to the current closed door negotiations without the deliberations necessary for decisions of such far reaching consequences. Failing this there is the McConnell Plan B. Boles- Simpson focussed on tax expenditures as a key part of their plan. Martin Feldstein and other experts also point to limiting or eliminating "tax expenditures" (the deductions and loopholes that reduce revenues) as a key part of the solution to the U.S. deficit problem....

LyrArc Article Gist
John Carney of the WSJ looks at the financial transactions tax proposed by 2016 U.S. presidential candidate Bernie Sanders to pay for high college tution costs.

LyrArc Article Gist
The tax plan offered by Jeb Bush in September 2014 is based on simplifying the tax code to three rates, lowering the corporate tax rate to stimulate business investment and growth. It will pay for this by limiting itemized deductions to 2% of adjusted gross income, removing state and local tax deductions, by generating higher growth of estimated 0.5% per year which translates into higher tax revenues, and by increasing the deficit by $1.2 trillion. In the last tax debate economists such as Martin Feldstein and other experts proposed removing or limiting the itemized deductions. Simplifying the code and lowering corporate tax rates has been favored as a method to jumpstart growth by many experts, but was not taken up during the deep recession following the 2008-2009 financial crisis when the stimulus added to the deficit. The 3 tax rates changes the current 7 brackets to 10 percent, 25 percent and 28%, with the coporate tax rate lowered to 20%. The plan removes the alternative minimum tax, the estate tax, marraige penalty tax, leaves charitable deductions as now. To help the people at the lower end in incomes and the middle class- the standard deduction is doubled, the earned income tax credit expanded. Companies would be allowed to deduct capital investments, and there would be a gradual phase out of taxation on income American companies earn overseas. Hedge funds will not have access to a loophole called "carried interest." The plan comes as the American economy is in recovery mode, making it more likely that increased growth would generate extra tax revenues....

LyrArc Article Gist
The "cut, cap and balance" pledge of Republican candidates for the presidential election of 2012. The current House version requires capping federal spending at 19.9% of GDP by 2018. This say House leaders is in accordance with the average spending levels for the last 30 years. It would have to come down from 24%. The balanced budget amendment caps spending at 18% of GDP and a balanced budget within a decade. The pledge is written promise to cut spending immediately.

LyrArc Article Gist
The skills to navigate different personalities and work patiently on the issues surrounding changes to the U.S. tax system of Rep. Dave Camp (MI), chairman of the U.S House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, will be immensely useful in the effort to make changes to the U.S. tax system. Camp works well with fellow House Republican leaders Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, and his Democratic counterpart in the U.S. Senate Max Baucus. Camp is a good listener, refuses to engage in partisan criticism, and has the patience to work through difficult issues of achieving savings and keeping fairness in the the tax changes. Earlier efforts to achieve consensus in late 2011 failed, making it even more important to have leadership which can create productive debate and bridge the differences. The tax changes are part of the overall effort for U.S. economic recovery by reducing the deficit.

LyrArc Article Gist
Romney says in the first presidential debate he will not increase taxes on the middle class: "I will not reduce taxes paid by high income Americans. And I will not, under any circumstances, raise taxes on middle-income families. I will lower taxes on middle income families." How he would do this is through limiting or eliminating deductions and loopholes among several measures, with work done on this by his advisor Martin Feldstein, Reagan's economic advisor and a professor at Harvard University- Romney's Tax Plan can raise revenue, WSJ, 8/28/2012. Where the Democrats and Republicans differ is that economic growth generated by creating incentives for business to invest and hire also plays a part in generating the additional revenues as it did under Reagan's economic plan. Behavioural factors play a large part of this as much as the incentives and other steps, to create a climate of business confidence- search in Janvoo for the Group "Reagan memo of 1980 by Shultz, Friedman," for more on this....

LyrArc Article Gist
New York city Mayor Bloomberg, says President Obama and Republicans should stop promising a free lunch, or something for nothing. He points to Obama's reelection strategy of higher taxes for the rich- by taxing those earning over $1 million at minimum of 30% in federal income taxes- as generating $1.1 billion, according to Congress's Joint Committee on Taxation. This would make little difference on a federal government with $1.2 trillion gap in spending and revenue. And he says Republicans who say making the Bush tax cuts permanent while at the same time cutting the deficit are promising a free lunch, with no connection to reality. The answer says Bloomberg should be to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for all groups, for shared sacrifice, and for Congress to pass the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan with $4 trillion in savings on an up or down vote.

LyrArc Article Gist
Rep. Dave Camp, House Ways and Means Committee chairman, representing northern Michigan, says every deduction in the tax code is there because of a reason, and powerful lobbies will oppose any changes. The best he can do is work himself out of this job as he will have to tackle the Democrats on entitlements, the business lobbies on tax loopholes, and other lobbies protecting their preferences in the tax code. He plans to achieve a simpler tax code with lowered rates of 25% for business and earners above six figures, and 10% for everyone else. The approach he is taking is to be revenue neutral when tackling tax reform, in the belief that the economic growth generated from a simpler tax code and lower rates would generate revenues of 18 to 19% of GDP, up from about 16% today. He says the economc cost of not getting this done to get the economy rolling again is so high that he is upbeat that both sides can come together after the election no matter who wins. He is also looking at a repatriation tax of 5% on profits kept by American companies overseas, which would boost revenues for business which could be reinvested in stead of sitting idle. Today the much steeper tax rate on repatriation makes businesses reluctant to bring it back....

LyrArc Article Gist
Glenn Hubbard, Professor at Columbia University and Bush adviser who helped design the Bush tax cuts, has an uneasy sense about the tax cuts today. He says the tax cuts have been undermined by years of deficit spending. The Bush tax cuts expire Dec 31st 2010 in the USA if Congress does not act. Macroeconomic Advisors estimates that letting the tax cuts expire will take 0.9% off the growth rate. Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman prefers to let the tax cuts expire and provide more help to state and local governments to preserve jobs that are being lost due to budget shortfalls. But becuase of the political climate he prefers to let the tax cuts go on for a limited period. The Obama administration may decide to continue with the tax cuts rather than fight the serious battles for deficit reduction, after spending much of its political capital on health care reform. Hubbard also thinks in the current situation its best to keep the tax cuts even with the concern for the deficits. He says the spending during the Bush administration, especially the Medicare prescription drug benefit, which is estimated to cost $400 billion from 2004-2013, was a major problem. The incentives to business and investors for productive effort in the Bush tax cuts is uncertain, if it becomes clear that the price for these cuts is higher taxes later on to cover growing deficit spending. Hubbard does not see any serious action on the deficit till the next Presidential term and sees it better to keep the tax cuts till then, when some serious discussion can take place....

LyrArc Article Gist
The structure of the deal that is coming up for a vote in Congress on August 1st, a day before the August 2 deadline. A deal put together mainly by Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell and Vice President Biden after other deals failed. It gives the government $400 billion immediately and another $500 billion in the fall for raising the debt ceiling. Another 1.2 trillion will be added in 2012. The entire burden for raising it falls on Obama. Obama will be able to get the debt ceiling raised without another long struggle before 2012 elections. On spending cuts- agency spending will be cut by $900 billion over the next 10 years. A new legislative committe will be set up to come up with $1.2 trillion in additional savings by the end of 2012. The mechanism that would force the committe to act or make sure spending cuts were taken if the committee failed, was set up as one in which the trigger is to force automatic across the board cuts. The automatic across the board cuts would be for $1.2 trillion to agency budgets for the next 10 years, and split this half and half between domestic programs and defence. Programs aiding the poor including Medicaid and Social Security would be exempted, but Medicare payments to providers could be touched. No new taxes are part of this deal....

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Supercommittee in Congress fails to reach an agreement to come up with $1.2 trillion in savings to reduce the deficit by the Nov. 23, 2011 deadline. This shifts the focus to the sequester or triggering automatic cuts in Jan. 2013, as mandated in the Congressional deficit reduction deal of August 2, 2011. These automatic cuts would reduce defense spending by 10%, cut social programs without touching Medicaid and Social Security, by 7.8%, and reduce Medicare payments by 2%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt points out in the NYT that Hillary Clinton actually won in the popular vote by a substantial margin, by more than 2 million votes and more than 1.5 percentage points. He says that Democrats need to pay more attention to the working class in midwestern states- the job losses, crumbling infrastructure, and the plight of communities such as Detroit, Michigan which suffered through the bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM, and again with the foreclosure crisis, the financial crisis of the City of Detroit. With a similar situation in the neighboring states of Wisconsin and Ohio, in places like Toledo and other parts of communities facing industrial decline. While the Silicon Valley centred region powered the economy in California, and the financial industry and real estate powered New York, older midwestern communities never really recovered from a long decline stretching over 2 decades. The result was the loss of faith in Democrats among union workers and young people, leading to the loss of Wisconsin, Ohio and Michigan. For most of its history the Democratic Party was based on its union and working class base including a large number of white voters. Only under Obama because of his unique candidacy was the coalition so dependent on the minorities vote. Before minorities were part of the Democratic coalition, but not in the way under the Obama candidacy. A return to its historic and normal base among whites in unions and working class communities, liberals, minorities, is a way to go back to the historic and natural base of Democratic support. In a sense dependence on tech communities for election funding and the tech booms, globalization, may have distorted Democrats sense of their historic role as champions of the working class and middle class communities throughout the country. There is now an opportunity to restore this lost mission of protecting the interests of the middle and working class who have seen huge drop in net worth as reported by Janet Yellen of the Federal Reserve at the Inequality Conference on October 17, 2014-"62 million households with a net worth of $11,000 for the year 2013." Poorly covered in the media and not made the utmost priority by Democrats (or Republicans). In the words of Janet Yellen, this was in the past several decades "the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality since the Great Depression." She added the shocking words "by some estimates, income and wealth inequality near their highest levels in the past hundred years, and probably much higher than much of American history before then." Even discussion in the media goes back to the Obama coalition and treats it as a way forward for Democrats, when history shows it was different and the situation described by Yellen calls for a serious response. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Tax Plan of Jeb Bush, with the help of advisors Martin Feldstein and Kevin Warsh, lowers the top personal tax rate from 40% (including surcharges) to 28%, and reduces the corporate tax rate from 30% to 20%. The plan is designed to jumpstart the economy for higher growth by increasing business investment and incentives. Businesses are allowed to deduct 100% of new investment immediately. The idea is to increase capital investment so that benefits also go to workers in higher wages. The Bush economic advisors see 50% of the corporate tax burden as affecting workers wages- average compensation would go up by $2750 a year by 2020 and $6200 by 2025 in 2015 dollars. Companies can pay a one time 8.75% tax on money earned and held overseas, paid over 10 years- about $2.1 trillion of this income held overseas can be added to the pool available for business investment. As proposed earlier by Feldstein the itemized deductions including mortgage interest can be taken only upto 2% of adjusted gross income, suggestions during the reform effort not taken up by Obama. To reduce the excessive use of leverage in business decisions the field is levelled for use of debt and equity by removing the deduction for business interest expense. This editorial says that by putting in the details, which political leaders tend to leave vague on specific figures, Jeb Bush and his advisors have taken a crucial step forward. This it says, shifts the debate from current shallow posturing to how America can lay the groundwork for the kind of growth needed to help increase wages, increase economic growth to higher levels, and preserve America's position in the world....

LyrArc Article Gist
This NYT editorial on the Jeb Bush Tax Plan says Bush has taken into account the shift in voter sentiment and focus on increasing inequality, with Trump, Kasich and Huckabee sounding these themes in their campaigns. The WSJ editorial on the same day also mentioned the plan's effort to help improve worker wages by increasing business investment, and creating the kind of growth where workers could share in the benefits. Jeb Bush made the lack of economic mobility a focus of his speech at the 2013 CPAC conference, a theme he shares along with his concern for fair treatment of Hispanic immigrants. In his speech at the 2013 CPAC conference Bush said: "the central mission of conservatives is to reignite social mobility in this country- restoring the right to rise," and pointed to the loss of economic mobility in the U.S. compared to any point since World War II.

LyrArc Article Gist
Paul Krugman points out that the Bush tax cuts if continued in the US for all income levels will cost $680 billion over the next decade. This estimate is from the Tax Policy Center.