LyrArc Article Gist
Italy will get 6 billion euros in savings from lower interest rate charges on its debt as a result of lower borrowing costs in capital markets. Italy's borrowing costs were at record low of 2.08% for debt issued in 2013. The new budget fails to provide relief in payroll taxes that would help reduce high youth unemployment. A payroll tax cut will increase take home pay of lower income workers by about 15 euros a month. Carlo Cottarelli, IMF expert, has the task of doing a spending review to cut 32 billion euros in public spending within 3 years. The Letta administration is looking at which tax credits to eliminate. These tax breaks range from aftershool sports programs and veterinary costs and amount to 130 billion euros a year. Automatic measures to reduce spending are part of recent Italian legislation and act to keep spending down. limits in the event the political system fails to produce agreement.

LyrArc Article Gist
The failure of the 117th Congress to pass key parts of president Biden's agenda for hard hit families and workers in America is now taking place. The 50-50 standoff in the US Senate and failure of two Democrat senators Sinema of Arizona, Manchin of West Virgina to support Biden's Families and Workers Plan leaves key parts of the safety net being left out. This leaves out the education, and paid leave part of the agenda and provisions for utilities to accelerate shift away from coal out of the bill. It fails to implement a new national agenda for upward mobility, child care and paid leave to help stressed out mothers and families. The failure to include even a modest community college 2 years of support at a time when men's college enrollment is dropping to disastrous levels for America's economic competitiveness is a failure of the 117th Congress to grasp the needs of families and workers in America today. Only a new Congress in 2022 can take up the needed action for families and workers in education, health care, child care and help for families. The passage of the infrastructure bill and the current version of the social spending bill can only be seen as a first step in the right direction, after three decades of different administrations neglecting infrastructure, education, healthcare, childcare, elderly care, upward mobility, and climate change. On the plus side as the first step to restore dignity and health of families and workers in America it includes- $150 billion for rental assistance, home buying help, public housing repairs, and building 1 million affordable housing units. $150 billion for federal programs for home health care and community care for older Americans and people with disabilities $165 billion to reduce premiums for people under Affordable Health Care Act, cover additional 4 million through Medicaid, adding hearing coverage but not dental or vision to Medicare. $200 billion for child care tax credit to parents. $400 billion to reduce health care costs and give universal pre-kindergarden for 3-4 year old children. $40 billion for worker training $555 billion for fighting climate change including through tax incentives for sources of energy that are low emission and low carbon. It will be paid for by additional taxes on incomes of very high income earners in annual $1 million plus range, and by having a corporate minimum tax of 15% for large corporations, including on profits overseas, that previously did not pay this tax. A wealth tax on unrealized capital gains of billionaires or other wealth of the richest Americans is left for a future Congress to consider for financing the key parts of climate change provisions, education and health care that were left out. The education and healthcare provisions need to be expanded to restore America's historic mission of upward mobility for all. A provision for Medicare to comprehensively negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies that would be taken for granted in any advanced country as in Europe, is also left for a future Congress that understands and responds to the dire needs of families and workers in America for affordable healthcare medicine neglected by administration after administration for the last three decades.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A study by ITEP, Institute for Taxes and Economic Policy shows the top 1% pay less in taxes on income than every other group in 42 American states. The poorest fifth pay taxes 60% higher than top 1%. The most regressive states are Florida, Washington, Tennessee, Pennsylvania and Nevada. The tax systems seen as reducing inequality are D.C. Minnesota, New York, Vermont, New Jersey. This happens at a time of growing inequality, high cost of living, and the aftereffects of the pandemic on health and mental health, with high cost of pharmaceuticals with entrenched lobbies, low enrollment of men in colleges with increasing dropouts, the huge burden of student debt on young people.

LyrArc Article Gist
What is theaverage income of a Ohio plumber and how many have health insurance? Is he a working class man? Well it turns out that Joe the Plumber Republican candidate for President 2008 refers to could be an exception but the average plumber makes $47,930 according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics occupational earnings report for May 2007 for plumbers in Ohio. And the Ohio plumbers income was only 15% higher than in the 2000 report when the consumer prices in midwest rose by 17%. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation in 2007 only 45% of companies with fewer than 10 employees offered health benefits, down from 57% in 2000. And 2007 was a good year, the statistics for 2008 and 2009 would look much worse as the downturn takes shape. As Chapman another Nobel prize winning economist wrote in the WSJ oped pages the stimulus checks were spent on more purchase of consumer goods merely continuing a high debt low savings spendthrift pattern of consumer behaviour and delayed the economic crisis for 6-12 months. Underlying incomepatterns like the one above where working class Americans were actually more and more worse off in an accelerating pattern may have become glossed over in consumer debt and housing boom behaviour....

LyrArc Article Gist
The tough job President Obama faces as he faces opposition from politicians who have interests to protect, and healthcare businesses with interests to protect. The President has to come up with a plan that is deficit neutral, because financial markets could see a healthcare bill that further widens the deficit as a signal for higher interest rates that would deepen the recession. At the same time each of the three sources of revenue puts him at loggerheads with political leaders in Congress or groups with interests to protect. Limiting income tax deductions for high earners could raise $267 billion in 10 years. It would require taxpayers in the top tax brackets deduct their mortgage interest, state and local taxes, and charitable donations, at the 28% tax rate instead of the 33% and 35% tax rates. The opposition is with democratic leaders that it would hurt charities, universities that depend on tax deductible donations, and taxpayers in high tax cities like New York city that are the home base of Democratic leaders. Yet only 1.4% of households would be affected says the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University, says charitable giving would decrease by 2%. The other opposition on this comes from the preference of Senators Baucus and Grassley, who head the Senate Finance Committee, for tax increases or cost savings to come from the health sector. Specifically they want to see the value of workers' employer provided health benefits subject to income taxes. It is a situation in which every sensible person admits the need for healthcare reform and would see the current pace of healthcare costs as unsustainable and dangerous; and after that will just go back to his group and try to preserve as much of the status quo as possible, so as not to disturb by much the benefits or compensation they have secured from the system over the years. Then there are political leaders in Congress with their own preferences, and Congressmen who are the subject of heavy lobbying by these interests. The administration and the Presidents job is to navigate this stream with a workable deficit neutral plan, without any requirement for any group to make sacrifices, and in some situations even small sacrifices for the public interest. Would charitable institutions be hurt that much, what if charitable institutions were exempted, why would other interests the try to obtain the same exemption. Its like the unions trying to keep the old unsustainable goldplated healthcare and other benefits at GM even as the ship was going down. Taxing employer provided employee health benefits as income would raise $2.5 trillion over a decade. The opposition here is from unions which are a force in the Democratic party and which count tax free health benefits as a legacy of the labor movement. Employer provided health insurance covers 160 million American employed and their dependents under the age of 65, so it has a wide impact. Yet most economists favor ending the tax break. They say it mainly goes to upper income taxpayers, and discourages cost consciousness among consumers of health care, thus encouraging excessive spending and surging health care costs. Senior Obama advisors, Peter Orszag, the budget director, and economist Jason Furman favor this approach. So do Republicans in Congress. Senators Baucus and Grassley are not asking for the complete removal of the tax break, what they want to see is capping the value of benefits that go untaxed. If the tax-free limit is $13,000, a policy worth $15,000 would pay income taxes on $2000. A third spource is to spend less on Medicare. About two thirds of the $948 billion in savings Mr Obama has proposed over 10 years comes from a number of reductions in Medicare spending. $177 billion comes from insurance companies bidding for government reimbursements for offering private plans to seniors. $106 billion comes from cutting the subsidies to hospitals serving the uninsured as universal coverage should remove this need. And $110 billion in reduced payments to hospitals and doctors because of productivity gains. A range of industries insurance companies, hospitals, doctors drugmakers, nursing homes, home health care companies and medical device makers, all stand to lose from reduced payments from Medicare and Medicaid. And these groups with interests to protect are another factor in this process of working out a healthcare plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out that the federal tax rate for the top 1% is 34% in 2013, according to the Congressional Budget Office, because president Obama let the high end Bush tax cuts to expire. It is the number to remember says Krugman- 34. In 2008 the figure was 28.2. Under Hillary Clinton the average tax rate for the top 1% would go up by 3.4 percentage points, according to the Tax Policy Center. Some of this would help pay for the tution plan to provide access to the middle class to public universities. Under populist Trump, Krugman points to the elimination of the inheritance tax and tax rates going down substantially, and no such programs to promote the upward mobility that everyone is talking about, and no way to pay for a big infrastructure building effort for growth and jobs- upward mobility that is the focus of every candidate's election campaign including Sanders, Trump in appealing to older white working class families, Clinton, Ryan, Bush, and others in both parties.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Leonhardt says that there is little reason to think that the flatter rates are better always. With the need to finance Medicare and health care for all, the government can use the extra dollars from taxing the very wealthy, the very rich in different tax brackets. The top bracket in 2008 started at 357,000, and you paid 35% whether you made 400,000, or $4 million, or $40 million. So basically the upper middle class was lumped in with the extremely wealthy. And considering the cost of college tutions for 2 or 3 kids, the upper middle class is only middle class. It makes sense not to lump the two together. Considering that there has been a lot of wealth accumulated at the the very high end, it would also reduce inequality, generate tax revenues for health care, and not have much effect in the incentives for generating economic growth. It is something he says the Obama adminisstration may and should consider.

LyrArc Article Gist
The introduction of a tax on sugary drinks to fight a surging diabetes rate, setup of a universal social security system, unemployment insurance and tax reform by the Nieto administration in Mexico in 2013. Taxes on high income earners will increase from 30% to 32%, a capital gains tax of 10%, and closing of some corporate tax loopholes such as tax consolidation to offset losses in one subsidiary against gains at others, are part of the tax changes. The remarkable aspect of these changes is the Pacto de Mexico signed by the three major political parties, centre left and right, to provide Mexico a new competitiveness for the economy, eliminate monopolistic pricing, introduce testing of teachers in the education system, combat health risks such as diabetes, and the social reform of seting up a social security system that Mexico lacked. Nieto said in a televised address while being flanked by the leaders of three major parties- "the tax reform is a social reform." For the first time in decades Mexico is poised to compete in a global economy with a new spirit of change and renewal....

LyrArc Article Gist
Is the market in S. Korea reflecting the bursting of the housing bubble in the USA, or is it simply a result of the Roh government's new taxes and rules for real estate such as the capital gains taxes of a shigh as 60% and the restriction on loan size so that monthly payments do not exceed 40% of monthly income. If its the new rules then it must be true that the crisis in the USA must have made the pause from the Roh measures give the market time to reflect. One factor is the oversupply from the building boom especially since the new housing had become increasingly unaffordable to average South Koreans at 100 time average income a 3 bedroom apartment cost $2 million in Seoul. A real estate Professor at Konkuk University estimates that about 1 million units will come onto the market by 2013. 2013 thats because the construction has continued even as sales have come to a near halt. Apartment prices have gone up 3% in 2008 compared to 93% in the last 5 years according to Kookmin Bank. What does this mean for the other Asian markets such as China, India and other Asia. Its not just speculation thats disappearing, but is there a sense that the market for Asian goods in the USA, especially for export powerhouses in Asia such as South Korea, is taking a hit from the credit and housing crisis in the USA. And if thats the case what does this mean for other Asian housing markets in bubble mode, consider this a Early Warning Link. See the link to the South Korean election where even corruption charges against the favored candidate are not affecting his popularity because he is seen as a candidate to who could help S. Korea overcome fears about the economic future. Comments that the current crisis is tougher for real estate and construction than the one during the Korean financial crisis of the 1990's suggest that this is something serious. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ report shows how retirement looks in America from the financial and lifestyle aspects. The median net worth for people 65-74 years is about $266,000 compared to an average net worth of 5 times that of $1.2 million for this group. This means wealth is highly skewed in America today with a small percentage of high wealth group pushing the average up this much- a result of neglect of American manufacturing that sharply reduced income and savings security of working families, and the impact of laissez faire policies of the administrations since the 1970's with financial crises hurting workers and families. The impact of wars was also borne heavily by workers and families with the neglect of infrastructure and public services in a misallocation of the nation's wealth.  Other points of note are the way time is spent today in retirement with less educational activity or volunteer work than one would imagine, and not enough time for exercize. Only a miniscule amount of time goes to volunteer work (.17 hours) or reading (.57 hours) compared to watching television (4.50 hours) for retirees. Exercize that keeps people healthy one would expect it to go up in retirement only shows .29 hours. Arts and entertainment or cultural activities only 0.05 hours, people are lonelier spending less time with each other with 0.57 hours for socializing and communicating. All showing how Americans in retirement can do better and live better lives by increasing the amount of time they spend in these healthy activities and less on television. Television which is also a sedentary activity takes up 3 times all the other activities essential for healthy living just mentioned combined. Little or no time is spent in meditation, mindfulness or mental wellness, as this grouped under prayer shows only .07 hours or just a few minutes a day.  Small changes that are made in the right direction would do much good for the quality of living for all Americans. Combined with an effort for the renewal of infrastructure and public services this would be an effort in the right direction, contributing to the well being of America.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal points out that about 3.92 million people in the U.S. reported income above 200,000 in 2009, and paid $434 billion in taxes. Of these people 90% are not millionaires. The overwhelming majority of the people affected by an increase in taxes on the middle class with incomes above $200,000 are not millionaires. The editorial asks a question about "fairness" for these Americans- who pay a large share of their income for higher university tution payments for kids- for whom the taxes can make a difference.

LyrArc Article Gist
Christina Romer, Prof. of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, was chairwoman of the Council of Economic Advisors under U.S. president Obama. Here she discusses the different aspects of the debate on raising the minimum wage. Romer says the negative effects on unemployment are small. The impact on consumer spending is also limited. The anti-poverty effects are real for raising the minimum wage from the current $7.25 an hour, says Romer, as over half the families earning a minimum wage make less than $40,000 an hour. President Obama called for raising the minimum wage to $9 an hour in 2013. Studies show 13 million U.S. workers earning less than $9 an hour. Raising the incomes of these families by about $3500 an year under the president's proposal gives workers badly needed income to cope with rising cost of gas, food and other basic necessities. The effects on consumer spending are small, estimated at between $10 to $20 billion. Its main virtue is keeping the principle of fairness and maintaining social cohesion at a time of increaing inequality. Romer says there is competition for workers which makes it possible for workers at the lower end to get a fair wage, but does not account for the effect of high unemployment which takes pressure off raising the minimum wage in the market economy. Another benefit for countries of keeping a fair minimum wage is that other actions can be taken to improve competitiveness for business and manufacturing and reducing the deficit and be seen in a positive context of overall improvement. This is part of the case made in Europe for boosting the mnimum wage as austerity measures are taking place....

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican Majority leader in the U.S. Senate has come up with a new health care bill that is aimed at winning over reluctant Republican Senators. Two taxes on high income people on 3.8% investment income and a payroll tax of 0.9% on incomes over $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for couples are retained in this version of the bill, which adds $231 billion over a decade. Some of this is used to offset rising premiums in the new bill, and provide additional funds. The deep cuts to Medicaid are retained and Senator Collins of Maine says she is opposed to the new bill because this will hurt people in rural areas of Maine, and does nothing to change this. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky is also opposed to the bill. Opposition comes from moderate Senators opposed to deep cuts to Medicaid in Republican health care alternatives to president Obama's Affordable Care Act, and from conservative Senators opposed for other reasons.  Senator Graham of South Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana introduced their own version just minutes before Mitch McConnell brought up his revised bill. All Democratic Senators are opposed to the Republican bill and call the deep cuts to Medicaid disastrous for lower income people.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The first presidential debate in Denver, Oct 3, 2012. For the first time Romney came out as a recent Republican governor of Massachusetts, the most liberal leaning state in the U.S. For a reason that remains a mystery, except that Romney had to shore up support with the conservative base of the Republican party, Romney did not aggressively adopt positions that would appeal to the vast majority of Americans- from people on foodstamps which he said in this debate had increased by millions under the Obama administration, working class Americans, ordinary Americans about to lose insurance with higher premium costs from the unending increase in the cost of healthcare, seniors on Social Security, workers insecure or losing jobs as the economy fails to recover, and young people who cannot find work. As governor of Massachusetts Romney had to be able to address the needs of different income groups, the middle class and working Americans, and his own father who is his role model was a governor of Michigan, a liberal leaning midwestern state with the largest number of autoworkers in the U.S. He asked Obama directly how he could have focussed on Obama care and passed it without a single Republican vote when 23 million Americans were out of work and the first priority should have been high unemployment. Obama responded by saying he would defend the middle class but did not say what he would do in the next 4 years that was different from the economic policies between 2004-2008. Romney made clear that he was not going to reduce taxes if it would increase the deficit even though Obama said Romney planned to increase taxes by $5 trillion and worsen the deficit. At one point Romney said looking at Obama that he could own a house, a plane, but could not own the facts....

LyrArc Article Gist
President Obama's proposal on Dec. 17, 2012, in the fiscal cliff negotiations sets the figure at which Bush era tax cuts are permandently extended at $400,000 instead of the $250,000 in earlier proposals. Speaker Boehner's Republican proposal was for a figure of $1 million. The $400,000 proposal would mean that the top tax bracket of 35% would increase to 39.6%. Currently the tax rate increases to 35% from 33% at the cutoff point of $388,500. The White House plan now cuts spending by $1.22 trillion over 10 years. $800 billion comes from cuts to programs, with half of these cuts in federal health care programs, $200 billion in programs like farm price supports, $100 billion in military spending, and $100 billion in other domestic programs over which Congress has control. The White House proposal also supports additional spending on infrastructure, extension of expiring unemployment benefits, protection of "vulnerable populations" such as the disabled and wounded veterans on Supplemental Social Security benefits in inflation calculations, and permanently stop expansion of the alternative minimum tax affecting the middle class. On business investment the president's proposal would make permanent the credit for corporate research and development....

LyrArc Article Gist
Britain's Tax Service reports the number of taxpayers reporting incomes of 1 million pounds a year declined by over 60% in fiscal 2010-2011 from the prior year. In 2010 the Labor government of Gordon Brown introduced a 50% income tax rate for this income group, up from 40%. The number of million dollar incomes filed declined to 6000 from 16000 in 2009-2010, and revenues declined from 13.4 billion pounds or 9% of total taxes from taxpayers to 6.5 billion pounds or 4.4% or about half. The Labor government had hoped for additional 2.5 billion pounds in revenue, showig unintended consequences and surprises in economic policies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Earnings of the typical American man working full-time year round declined in 2010, and is now in inflation adjusted terms below the level in 1978, according to the U.S. Census Department. The income of a typical Ameircan family has declined for three consecutive years and is now at $49,445 for 2010. This is the level reached in inflation adjusted terms in 1996. 15.1% of the American people lived below the poverty line in 2010, and 22% of children lived below the poverty line. The poverty line is set at $22,314 for a family of four in 2010. Statisics from the U.S. Census Department.

LyrArc Article Gist
Andrew Rosenthal expresses Democratic party skepticism about Romney's tax plans to reduce tax rates for all Americans by 20%, reduce taxes for the middle class, and increase what the rich pay by reducing deductions and closing loopholes, and still be able to support the budget. Harvard economist and Romney advisor Feldstein has done the research on how Romney could do this and which loopholes Romney would address, in the WSJ 8/28/2012. The gap between the two parties is so large, and President Obama's failure to take the Simpson-Bowles recommendations to reduce deductions seriously, is leading to a lack of openness to different ideas.

LyrArc Article Gist
The first budget of the Obama government makes a sharp swing away from decades of earlier policy, and puts America on a new direction focussed on priorities in education, health care for all, and energy. The 134 page doocument on the budget defines the governing principles and priorities of the new government. "This is the legacy that we inherit- a legacy of mismanagement and misplaced priorities, of missed opportunities and of deep, strutural problems ignored for too long," the document says. It declares that "government must lead" in contrast to Reagan's "government is not the solution, government is the problem." In contrast to "trickle down" policies of Reagan it proposes "trickle up" policies- shifting income from rich to the poor. It creates a $630 billion fund towards a national health insurance program built with the help of savings and cuts elsewhere. Government takes over most student lending, and dramatically expands Pell grants for poor college bound strudents, transforming it into something like Medicare that is automatic rather than approved each year by Congress. Businesses that emit carbon and heat trapping gases will have to purchase permits to do so starting in 2012. Hundreds of billions of dollars from these permits will pay for clean-energy technology and for tax credits for working couples. Income tax rates will rise for couples earning more than $250,000 beginning in 2011 and will have lower personal exemptions, lower itemized deductions, and higher capital gains tax rates. The estate tax will be preserved. Hedge fund and private equity managers wil have to pay income tax rates for that compensation as high as 39.6% after 2010, not the low 15% capital gains rate they pay now. The Defense Department would see a $20.4 billion boost or a 4% increase in 2010 over 2009, it will request an additional $75.5 billion in 2009 for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and an additional $130 billion for 2010. The budget is for $3.6 trillion for 2009, and projects a deficit of $1.75 trillion for 2009, or 12.3% of GDP- a level see in 1942 when the US entered World War II. Under optimistic White House assumptions for a strong economic rebound, the deficit would drop to $533 billion by 2013....

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the gains on three fronts evident from the Census Bureau report of 5.2% gain in median income of households in the U.S. He says the first is the growth in incomes of ordinary working class and middle class families, second the large decline in the poverty rate, and third the further rise in insurance coverage in 2015 for people without health insurance. He points to the steady efforts of the Obama administration to improve lives of ordinary families as working based on the Census report though results have taken time, and could have been better. The Stimulus, says Krugman could have been larger following the blow of the 2009 financial crisis and increased unemployment at the time. Janet Yellen at the inequality conference of the Boston Fed in 2014 pointed out the problems of 62 million households having net worth of about $10,000, and why this was running against the American idea of a better life for all Americans. In that sense the Census report is a movement in the right direction but a lot remains to be done.   ...