LyrArc Article Gist
Alan Blinder, Princeton University professor and former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, says the biggest reason for the growing deficit in the years out to 2040 is because of increases in health care spending. Its not that there is runaway spending in other areas. He cites CBO projections that show other costs stable relative to GDP from 2015 to 2035 and declining. This is why healthcare spending is at the heart of the problem. And why tackling the deficit has a lot to do with reducing healthcare cost increases.

LyrArc Article Gist
Krauthammer cites Congressional Budget Office numbers that show the Obama U.S. health care law continues the spiralling costs of health care with new government mandates at a time of severe budget cuts in education and other areas- for 2013-2022 the costs come to $1.76 trillion. The initial Obama administration figures of 10 year costs of $938 billion announced in 2010 reflected the fact that the new U.S. health care law would take 4 years to fully go into effect. Costs after 2021 are shown to be $250 billion each year in the CBO figures. The law is now before the Supreme Court in 2012, which has to decide on the basis of the limits of the Commerce Clause.

LyrArc Article Gist
Are there costs or are there savings from the Obama health care bill? Does it affect jobs and how? The Congressional Budget Office says the health care law will save $230 billion in ten years based on a whole set of calculations and assumptions. Commonsense and basic math leads others to question how spending $930 billion on insuring 32 million Americans could end up with significant savings. The different view argues that the Budget Office erred in making some calculations, by counting $70 billion in premiums from long term care because they would be used to pay benefits later, omitted $115 billion in spending to adminster the law, and omitted $208 billion needed to prevent scheduled reductions in Medicare payments to doctors. The money needed on the Stimulus, on two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the uncertain prospects of the US economy in the longer term till debt and other issues are resolved, injects the critical element of difficult choices and priorities. If state and local budgets are severely strained in 2011-2012 would that require federal help and will there be other needs that will have to be met by the federal government that are critical such as another unexpected downturn, or a resolution of unresolved bad debt at the large US banks There is also a sense that the health care law does not do enough to reduce the cost of health care that will be needed over the next decade so that other priorities are not neglected. Both parties are not up to the task in this respect for running the country's finances withot using the numbers to tell different stories....

LyrArc Article Gist
The US House of Representatives voted 245-189 in favor of repealing the health care law. Only 3 Democrats joined the entire Republican caucus in voting for repeal, compared to 34 Democrats who voted in March 2010 against the health care law. This is a largely symbolic move as the Democrat controlled Senate will not consider the repeal, and even if it did the President would veto it. Republicans favor some aspects of the health care law which allow children to be on the parent's insurance till age 26, and a ban on insurers denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions. Opinion polls show 46% of respondents opposed repealing and eliminating the law, and 45% favored repealing it. The health care issue ranks third among the economic issues important to respondents, behind unemployment and reducing the federal budget deficit.

LyrArc Article Gist
The non-partisan approach taken by Republican governor Snyder of Michigan contrasts sharply with the approach of Governor Walker in Wisconsin and Governor Brownback in Kansas.

LyrArc Article Gist
Most Americans pay less in taxes, including state, local and federal taxes, today than in 1980 in inflation adjusted dollars. The taxes have gone down by 2-3% for incomes in the range of $50,000 to $150,000, and gone down by 3-4% for incomes between $150,000 and $350,000. Taxes have gone down over 7% for incomes above $350,000. The main reason is the decline in federal income taxes.Tax rates increased in the period to 1990 and declined from 1990 to 2010. The Democratic party and president Obama are pushing for increase in taxes for incomes above $250,000. Republicans are resisting the changes citing disincentives to investment and growth for small business which generates a large proportion of new jobs created in the U.S. economy. The New York Times study shows the percent of the U.S. population that makes between $200,000 and $350,000 almost doubling in the period 1980-2010 and at the same time its share of the U.S. income remaining the same - many small business owners who hire employees would fall into this income category. Republican's response is for tax reforms that reduce loopholes, deductions and other tax expeditures that disproportionately help the wealthy. Democrats say this cannot create enough revenues to address the deficit, when mortgage deductions, charitable deductions are excluded. The back and forth is leading to stalemate but also opening up discussion for the first time on whether the mortgage and charitable deductions make sense in today's environment. A significant portion of revenues lost in the mortgage deduction goes to affluent households, subsidizing larger borrowings to build larger homes than otherwise, according to the Brookings Institution. Politicians have resisted changes that would go against powerful lobyying groups in the past, yet the impasse has opened up new thinking outside the box because of the pressing need to come up with a solution....

LyrArc Article Gist
The authors, Becker, Davis and Murphy, are from the University of Chicago. They point out that the uncertainty created by the Obama administration's programs including healthcare and social investments in education, energy conservation, and the desire to reduce carbon emissions, all tend to slow business expansion and investments to create jobs by putting additional costs on business. The expanding federal deficit and national debt also create additional uncertainty. Their point is that it was a mistake to start making major changes to transform the U.S. economy at this time, and that it would have been wiser to do these changes after the economy had recovered completely from the crisis. All efforts they say should have been concentrated on establishing conditions for a strong recovery. When combined with the lack of regulatory reforms to fix problems left behind from the crisis, and other failures, serious questions arise about how things will turn out in coming years. See Krugman- The Feeling of 1937, where Krugman takes this up from another angle, again with concerns about the future....