LyrArc Article Gist
Stephen Moore of the WSJ interviews Grover Norquist, head of the advocacy group Americans for Tax Reform. Republicans in Congress and other Republican leaders have signed on to the "no new taxes pledge" promoted by Norquist. There is increasing pressure on Norquist as the media, White House, and executives on Wall Street call for flexible positions from both sides on taxes and spending cuts. Norquist insists that not much has changed. He says that the increase in taxes on the rich is only symbolic and has to be followed up with increasing taxes on the middle class. He cites a Rasmussen poll that shows 75% of Americans believe this. Norquist is convinced that the Democrats with their spending plans are out to take the U.S. in the direction of European economies, the tax increase on the rich would be followed up with a energy tax or a value added tax to pay for unrestrained spending. His solution is for Republicans to pass a bill that extends the current tax rates past January after roughing it through the tax cliff date. Even the sequester option is better than increasing taxes says Norquist, letting the Defense Department make the cuts where appropriate. Norquist does not favor the option of reducing tax loopholes and deductions as a way to increase taxes as proposed by Simpson Bowles commission and Ryan-Romney in the election campaign. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A Pew Research poll shows Democratic voters now favor a bold ambitious agenda by large margins. Voters seeking compromise swung sharply going downwards from 69% to 46%. Many are calling for Medicare for All. In the Republican Party the shift is slight from 46% to 44%.

In the House the Congressional Progressive Caucus now has about 90 members. Of the 50 newly elected members who are House Democrats 20 are part of this Caucus pushing for bold action.

LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT says Bill Clinton moved the Democratic Party to the centre in 1992. In 2016 about 25 years later, after the removal of the Glass Steagall Act led to the 2008 global financial crisis and a deep recession, after the trade relations with China led to loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs over two decades and the hollowing out of industry in the midwest, things have changed. The revolution led by Bernie Sanders, a shrinking middle class, smaller access to college education for the middle and working class, and wide disparities in income, are putting the Democratic Party closer to its roots and the days of FDR. The Democratic Party platform calls for a 21st century Glass Steagall Act to separate normal banking from investment banking, opposes the TPP to prevent any further export of jobs overseas, and goes for a $15 minimum wage. This was also evident at the opening day of the Democratic National Convention when Sanders told the gathering in Philadelphia that even though he was not the candidate, these are the planks of the platform that Hillary Clinton will be pushing for in her presidency. What the editorial does not point out is that the Republican economic platform also calls for reinstatement of Glass Steagall Act, opposes TPP and opposes any loss of American jobs to overseas locations. It differs on the minimum wage leaving it to the states, and it is likely to skew tax cuts towards the wealthy, but also possibly removing the lower income brackets from taxes as Britain has done under the Conservative Party. Both parties today are looking for support from the middle and working class and have directed their appeal to these two groups which are in upheaval. The election of Trudeau in Canada recently also followed this trend, after the hollowing out of Canadian industry in Ontario and Quebec in a similiar pattern as in the midwestern U.S.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
How to deal with Bush era tax cuts is a big issue dividing Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. If no deal is reached by Jan 1. taxes on the average middle income family would increase by $2000 in 2013. Median inflation adjusted income declined 8.9% to $50,054 in 2011 from $54,999 in 1999, and economic mobility has fallen. The Democrat's position is for Bush tax cuts to apply to incomes below $250,000. Peter Orszag of the Congressional Budget Office and Jared Bernstein point out that while this makes the tax code move in a progressive direction it also creates handicaps in providing a sufficient revenue base to support middle class spending programs down the road. According to the Tax Polcy Center, if Congress is unable to reach agreement and all tax increases go into effect Jan 1, taxpayers in the bottom 20% of income distribution would see a $412 increase in taxes compared to an increase of $633,000 for the top 0.1%. New York Mayor Bloomberg has supported eliminating the Bush tax cuts for all groups, saying there is no free lunch. Alan Krueger, head of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, says the trends caused by globalization and skill-biased technological change which have increased inequality are likely to continue or accelerate. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Wall Street Journal in this editorial says President Obama is negotiating deficit reductions with Republicans to gain an advantage in the 2012 presidential elections. Its view is that President Obama is offering Republicans a Hobson's choice: if they agree to raise taxes they would be giving up on a campaign pledge, and if the government shuts down and seniors do not get retirement checks in August letting the Republicans take the blame. For this reason it supports Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell's proposal to give the President the authority to make the debt limit increase, and for Republicans to withdraw from talks on the deficit reductions that involve tax increases.

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman says Obama's 2012 presidential campaign lacks bold vision, a failure to articulate tangible achievements, and owes too much to campaign consultants. He describes it as being developed in test tube fashion. The failure to embrace and strongly advocate his own presidential commission's Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction plan, which could be coupled with long term investment in the productive potential of the U.S. economy, shows the lack of courage to prepare a plan going forward. It is likely to cost support of independent, center and center-right voters in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.

LyrArc Article Gist
John Taylor, a professor of economics at Stanford, points out that the numbers being thrown back and forth in the budget debate can be confusing. He suggests a better way to look at this. The U.S. budget was 20% of GDP in 2007, and has been at or below that level in recent years, before the higher spending to counteract the effects of the 2008 financial crisis. As the economy recovers and private investment increases it makes sense to bring the spending back to levels where it has been- spending levels that do not endanger the country's credit rating and are a prudent way to manage the nation's finances. Taylor asks the question- if the U.S. got by by spending 20% of GDP in 2007, then why is it not possible to do this in future years when the GDP will be higher. In 2000 spending was actually 18.2% of GDP. Taylor says that with higher incomes people will be moving into higher tax brackets which should increase revenues in future years. In three years since 2009 the spending levels are up to 24.4%. Under this scenario private investment would make up for lower government spending and debt, leading to higher employment and GDP as business confidence rises. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael McConnell, was Assistant General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget from 1981-1983. He is now a professor of constitutional law at Stanford University. Here he tries to throw light on how the budgetary process that is required by law, and which makes the formal budget proposed by the president available for public scrutiny, was circumvented through a sequence of events starting in February 2011. The Budget Act of 1974 sets specific deadlines and a process for generating revenue, setting spending priorities, and setting the debt limit. The President first submits his administration's budget by the first Monday in February. The Congressional Budget Office has until Feb. 15 to score the budget using identical metrics for all proposals for a consistent scoring. The budget President Obama put forward in February did not take into account the growing deficit and was rejected by the Senate 97-0. The President proposed a new plan in April 2011, but the proposed budget was so vague that CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said he could not score it. The subsequent efforts in June and July 2011 were carried out in closed door negotiations between senior Republican leaders and the Obama White House. This subverts the original intention of the law. The Budget Act says that both the House and Senate hold hearings on the proposal, with testimony from the administration, "national organizations" and the "general public." Transparency, openness and accountabilility are key aspects of a proper process that is democratic and prevents the parties from engaging in blame and competing claims. The closed door negotiating sessions and the lack of a concrete written budget proposal from the President has turned the current budget process into an effort by each side to see how it can best position itself for the 2012 presidential election. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
About 63% of respondents in a Washington Post/ABC poll conducted in July 2011 say they would look for new faces in Congress in the 2012 elections. There is serious public discontent with the lack of compromise by Republicans and Democrats in the debt ceiling and deficit reduction talks.

LyrArc Article Gist
Buffett's view that higher capital gains taxes will not result in less business investment. He favors a $500,000 figure instead of the $250,000 proposed by president Obama for Bush tax cuts for incomes below that level.

LyrArc Article Gist
Congressional Budget Office projections show the difficult choices facing the U.S. - tackling the deficit by letting the Bush tax cuts and the payroll tax cuts expire will lead to low growth. The alternative is growth with much higher deficits. GDP growth would be at about 2.3% in this fiscal year if the payroll tax cut is kept till December 2012. In fiscal 2013 if a number of tax cuts are permitted to expire and across the board spending cuts take effect as scheduled GDP growth would decline to 1.1%. Taxes would increase by $465 billion in 2013 over 2012 if tax cuts expire - individuals and companies would pay $2.99 trillion in taxes in fiscal year 2013 in that scenario. Spending cuts would take effect in Jan 2013 for $1.2 trillion over 10 years. The result- " a sharp fiscal contraction" in the words of CBO director Elmendorf. Unemployment would go up to 8.9% in 2012 year end and 9.2% in 2013 yearend from 8.5% today, if no agreement is made to extend tax cuts and block spending cuts. The risk of not taking the debt reduction actions is to let the debt grow to $11 trillion over 10 years, an unsustainable path, compared to about $3.1 trillion over 10 years if tax cuts are permitted to expire and spending cuts take place. This is the tough choice facing America in 2012, and comes when Europe is facing similar tough choices....

LyrArc Article Gist
Republican Senators Corker and Blount are confident that a solution can be devised for the sticking points on a deal between the Republicans and the Democrats. The Republicans consider the savings in the Reid plan from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq a "gimmick," but essentially the Reid and Boehner plans say analysts are similiar in the inital cuts in spending. The sticking point for Democrats is on the whole process of the debt ceiling extension having to be redone in early 2012. For Republicans the sticking point is in in tax increases which the Reid plan leaves out in the initial period for debt limit extension into 2013 when a new president takes office. House majority leader Boehner is facing opposition within his party and this restricts his leeway for striking a deal- the Boehner plan passed in the House by a vote of 218 to 210 on July 29, 2011, with 20 Republicans voting no. It was voted down in the Senate that same evening with a vote of 59 to 41, with 6 Republican senators joining all 53 Democratic senators. As it stands now, the weekend before the August 2 deadline, President Obama concedes that there is "rough agreement" about the size of the first round of spending cuts, and the "next step" to rein in borrowing. He went on to say that "if we need to put in place some kind of enforcement mechanism to hold us all accountable for making these reforms, I'll support that too, if it is done in a smart and balanced way." Its the design of this enforcement mechanism that is the main point in the remaining negotiation. The nature of the committee selected from both parties for the next phase of savings, its powers and the trigger in the sense of what it can ensure happening if no decisions are taken by both parties. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Democrats Reid and Schumer say Eric Cantor is a stumbling block to an agreement on the debt ceiling and deficit reduction. Plan B suggested by Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell, and supported by Senate Majority leader Reid, includes setting up a debt reduction panel of 12 members from both parties to draft a long term framework for reducing the national debt. The new debt committee would have a deadline to make recommendations, probably by the end of 2011. The recommendations would then be fast tracked through the House and the Senate without amendments. The McConnell plan is to separate the task of raising the debt ceiling from talks on deficit reduction.

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.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Altman's proposal for a tax on wealth over $1 million. He makes the case for taxing wealth not incomes to reduce inequality as this is where the situation in terms of inequality has worsened for the U.S. in recent decades. To support this proposal Altman cites the change in the U.S. Ginni coefficient, which measures inequality. The Ginni coefficient is anumber from 0 to 100 which goes up with higher income inequality. From the late 70's to the 1990's, the Cnesus Bureau showed this to be in the low 40's. By 1992 the Ginni coefficient went up to the mid-70's, according to the Federal Reserve data. It increased to about 80 in 2010. In 1992 the top 10% in the U.S. population controlled 20 times the wealth of the bottom 50%. By 2010 this figure triples to 65 times. and the graduated income tax even if it redistributes a small share of the wealth does little to affect the trend of wealth extremes from building up and threatening the social fabric of America, reducing mobility and opportunities for the bottom 50% to unprecedented levels since the 1950's. ...