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
Peter Coy of Bloomberg Business Week points out that the debt ceiling and proposed deficit reductions in the range of $4 trillion really obscure the real size of the problem which is much larger. The real problems hit when the U.S. faces a larger graying population by 2020 with sharply higher per capita health care spending; and at the same time workers from this generation retire and become beneficiaries of Social Security and Medicare with fewer younger workers to support the system with tax revenues. Another problem is that older Americans are likely as a voting bloc to vote themselves benefits that will cost the younger generation, benefits that the younger generation will not be able to enjoy. Even the Paul Ryan plan with its cuts to Medicare insulated todays seniors from the sharp cuts, as it becomes political necessity for both Republicans and Democrats to shy away from touching the current beneficiaries.

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
Samuelson points out that the golden age of bipartisan harmony never existed. Yet it is true to say that with the constant chatter on cable television and stridently expressed views, the activism of the more extreme wings of both American parties, and the role of money in politics, the partisan nature of politics in America has increased. And this is happening even when the Gallup polls from 1992 and 2010 show similiar numbers for the people who describe themselves as Conservative, Liberal or Moderate, showing that the people themselves haven't changed (42-43% Conservative, 35-36% Moderate, 17-20% Liberal), but activism at the edges of both parties has. In this condition, only 7% of americans have a "very positive view" of the Republican party, only 11% of Americans have a "very positive view" of the Democratic party and only 12% of Americans have a "very positive view" of the Tea party (even though the Tea party is at the height of its mometum). The net impact says Samuelson is that the nation's important problems get neglected. There is little discussion about the expenditure of blood and treasure in Afghanistan, says Tom Brokaw, see his article. There is little discussion of the need to rebuild America's deteriorating infrastructure. Or a serious discussion on deficits or energy. All this is lost in the dysfunctional politics of the moment. This is a significant observation....

LyrArc Article Gist
Charlie Rose talks to Paul Ryan, the Republican Congressman from Wisconsin on his "Roadmap for the Future" and a major overhaul of taxes, spending, Medicare and Social Security. He tells Rose, who hosts a news show on Bloomberg TV, that in 2010 he is all by himself looking at the big picture for shaping ideas on economic reform, and still hopes others will join him in this effort.