LyrArc Article Gist
Greg Ip of the WSJ provides this exceptional report offering readers remarkable clarity on what the Republican Tax Law does- its high and low points.  High Points 1. It reduces the corporate tax rate to bring it in line with other advanced industrialized countries. The corporate tax rate in Germany and Japan is 30%, in the UK it is 19%. For 5 years businesses can write off capital equipment immediately instead of depreciating over a couple of years. This could boost investment and growth. 2.  The law takes aim at deductions that led to distortions. It limits the mortgage interest deduction, and caps the deduction for state and local taxes. This removes the incentive to pay more for homes that exacerbated the housing crisis in 2008. The Alternative Minimum Tax is largely removed. The Low Points 1. The biggest drawback is that lawmakers did not properly fund the tax cuts. Of the 10 costliest tax breaks nine were not touched, including employer health insurance, retirement savings, capital gains. Only the state and local taxes deduction was reduced. And a new tax deduction  was created, a 20% tax deduction for small business (proprietors and partnerships) paying taxes on their individual tax returns. Taxes on the wealthy or value added taxes, reducing tax breaks, is how other advanced industrialized countries paid for the corporate tax cuts, but did not happen here. Additional economic growth  to generate added tax revenues is the way Republicans in Congress say this is funded. Yet this is a questionable assumption as Britain reduced the corporate tax rate to 19% without seeing a surge in economic growth, as Greg Ip pointed out in an earlier WSJ article. At best the Joint Committee on Taxation estimates $500 billion over a decade in added revenues from added growth leaving $1 trillion to be added to the deficit. The WhartonPenn Budget Model (WPBM) estimates only $140 to $367 bill from the additional economic growth resulting in added tax revenues. Under this model only 0.03 to 0.08 percent added U.S. economic growth per year is expected from the Republican Tax Cuts. Such a situation would be bad  for the U.S. as the gradual improvement in Debt to GDP ratio to 78% following the financial crisis of 2008 would be sharply reversed taking the ratio to 97% by 2027. An unsustainable trajectory which will require tax increases in a few years and hurt investment in education, health and infrastructure into the future. This is what worries many experts most on both sides of the political spectrum today about what the Republican Congress has pushed through for a legislative "victory." This is why experts believe this is not serious tax reform and will require a new effort after 2019.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Krugman points out the major problem in the Republican tax cut legislation in 2017- not enough to help the middle class and adding 1 trillion dollars to the deficit. Krugman says even the Bush tax cuts had enough broad public approval because of help to the middle class. So what is the Republican message and rationale for taking this action? This is that the tax cuts will generate an economic boom . Yet the tax cuts in other countries including Britain, as Greg Ip pointed out in the Wall Street Journal recently, have shown that this does not lead to the boost in economic growth that is expected. Krugman agrees that this is unlikely to happen. There is another rational explanation and this is Republican need for a legislative victory heading into next years midterm elections. In which case the decision for tax cuts was not really based on the deep sense and conviction after much debate that this will inevitably create a surge in economic  growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This view from the Editorial Board comes as Republicans in Congress geared up for a legislative victory decided to ignore the expert opinion of the Joint Committee on Taxation and polls showing a majority of Americans disapprove of the tax law. It says a "corrosive partisanship" that is affecting the nation has led to this decision. Not an informed consensus necessary to make real and lasting changes to the tax laws that increase growth without disrupting hard won gains in social cohesion after World War II.  Republicans pushed through a trillion and half dollars in tax cuts in the law that reduces the corporate tax rate to 21% from 35%, and cut taxes in 2019 by 51 times ($51,400) for the top 1% of incomes compared to ($1000) for middle class families earning less than $100,000 (Tax Policy Center). The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates it will add $1 trillion to the U.S. deficit as only $500 billion is expected in increase in government revenues over a decade from additional economic growth. This is supported by evidence from countries such as Britain that implemented this type of corporate tax cut without generating much economic growth, says Greg Ip in the Wall Street Journal. The "victory" then comes at a high cost says the Washington Post- in years to come programs to help the growing lower middle class and working class will be subject to cuts and taxes will have to rise to balance budgets.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
As the final Republican tax bill is debated in Congress on December 19, 2017, Senator Bob Casey cited the following points from the Joint Committee on Taxation Report on the floor of the Senate.  1. Americans building their hopes that their pay checks in February 2018 will be increasing are in for a big disappointment said Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a senior member of the Finance Committee. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimate is that for the 57 million families making less than 100,000 dollars a year the tax cuts in the Republican legislation will either not reduce their taxes or reduce the taxes by about $100 a year. 2. The bill does little for the big tasks facing America of rebuilding failing infrastructure. Senator Casey cited 4500 bridges needing repair or replacement in Pennsylvania alone. It also does little for health care access for middle class families and is likely to lead to 10% increase in health care premiums. Affordability of college and other hurdles of middle class and working class families remain unaddressed.   3. The $9 billion in the estate tax cuts would finance the Children's Health Insurance program which has expired.  4. The $36 billion in tax cuts for corporations comes at a time when corporate profits are at the highest they have been in 15 years, according to Vanguard founder Bogle. He also points out that wages as a percentage of GDP are the lowest in 15 years. The tax cuts in the Republican bill are not likely to correct this imbalance.  5. The share of GDP of people making more than one million dollars in 1980 was 11%, this is up now in 2017 to 20%. This has led to questions about the wisdom of these tax cuts which disproportionately benefit a very small percentage of Americans who do not need these tax cuts, and come with significant sacrifices for the middle class in terms of what is available in public services, and the cost to their children as infrastructure and access to health and education is made more distant because of a growing U.S. debt from this tax cut. The big problem then with this bill is that it further damages intergenerational mobility in the U.S., undermining the foundation of a democratic society. Damage has already happened in the past three decades as Federal Reserve chairman Janet Yellen pointed out at a conference on Economic Opportunity and Inequality on Oct. 17, 2014, saying-"The past several decades have seen the most sustained rise in inequality since the 19th century after more than 40 years of narrowing inequality following the Great Depression." This is why there is substantial agreement in the media from the Wall Street Journal's Greg Ip to Krugman in the New York Times that the bill fails to correct a harmful trend, and goes further in the wrong direction for a democratic society.       ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Senators approved the U.S. Republican tax bill 51 to 49 votes on December 1, 2017. The 500 page bill was approved with arewritten version containing more changes made at the last minute to get it passed in the early morning hours. It was passed along party lines with all Democrats opposing. The last minute changes were made to get Collins of Maine and Johnson of Wisconsin on board. A concession was made on DACA young undocumented immigrants for Flake of Arizona. In this way its passage was ensured after failure to repeal Obama health legislation. The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation report says the bill would increase the deficit by $1 trillion over a decade. Corker of Tennessee opposed the bill for this reason, but failed to convince other senators who believe the bill will generate robust growth and the deficit report is too pessimistic. The tax cut bill helps 70% of middle class families and may not help others because of removal of deductions such as the one for state and local income taxes. Business gets a permanent tax rate of 20 percent instead of 35 percent which is made permanent. Owners of small business not set up as corporations also get a tax break for small business. To offset the cost of the changes the Alternative Minimum Tax for corporations is retained and a tax on corporations with assets held overseas was increased. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The corporate share buybacks announced by U.S. companies in the last 3 months now exceed $200 billion, more than double than in 2017, according to a WSJ analysis. This includes Cisco, Wells Fargo, AbbVie, Amgen, Alphabet (Google). The surge in corporate buybacks started in December after the tax cut of the Trump administration cut U.S. taxes by $1.5 trillion over a decade, cutting the corporate tax rate for large companies from 35% to 21%. The tax cut also included a one time tax for repatriation of $2 trillion held by U.S. companies overseas. This WSJ analysis says there are questions whether the tax cut is working, whether it will encourage new investment, lead to companies increasing wages, or whether this will largely result in corporations returning money to investors with larger dividends and corporate buybacks. Morgan Stanley's analysis of earnings transcripts of companies in the S&P 500 show 44% of the companies say they will use some portion of the tax gains to make capital investments and increase wages, with 28% going in the opposite direction and using them to return money to shareholders. Experts caution that corporate buybacks do not always lead to the company's stock outperforming the stock market. The future of companies depends more on the capital investments and in human capital. There is a sense that workers wages have stagnated since the mortgage financial crisis in 2008, with the economic crisis, globalization and outsourcing, reduced alternatives for workers, geographic pressures in relocation, all pushing wages down.  This is being closely watched with articles on stagnation in wage growth this week in the NYT and WSJ, and earlier in the Economist magazine. Reports on the Trump administration tax cuts passed by a Republican Congress suggested a large tilt towards benefitting the highest income households. Problem with higher stock prices reaching the broader middle class are recognized in that one third of stocks are owned by overseas investors, and 84% of the remaining stocks are owned by the wealthiest 10%. Republicans have turned to bonuses typically of $1000 per person given by companies yet this amounts now to about a few billion dollars over an estimated 4 million Americans, says this WSJ analysis. This is not enough to justify a huge tax cut and raise the deficit by over a trillion over 10 years on the assumption that it would lead to higher wages or capital investment when about $200 billion goes to boosting stock prices. This comes at a time when the American middle class is not broadly invested in the stock market after the exit following the battering stock prices took during the 2008 financial crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Trump's 2017 budget is an effort to reshape spending priorities by the Republican party. Apart from Medicare and Social Security all other entitlement programs from the days of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society are subject to cuts. Deep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps, including introducing work requirements. The philosophy behind it is that compassion will now be measured not by how large these programs are but by how much the government can get people "off these programs and back in charge of their lives,"  according to Budget Director Mulvaney.  The cuts are $616 billion to Medicaid and Children's Health programs, $193 billion in cuts to Food Stamps, $143 billion in student loans, $72 billion in disability programs. The overhaul of the Affordable Health Care Act is part of this change. The reallocation would put more money into infrastructure for $200 billion, and in tax cuts, $19 billion in a parental leave program and $29 billion for veterans programs, plus added spending on the military. William Hoagland of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Republican who worked on budget issues says it will be politically difficult as the cuts to lower income groups come with tax cuts for small businesses and higher income individuals.  Beyond the policy priorities there is an area where both Republicans and Democrats are skeptical of the budget. This is how it impacts the U.S. debt. Under Congressional Budget Office estimates the U.S. debt as a percentage of GDP which rose to about 75% after the Great Recession starting in 2008, is projected to grow to about 85%. In sharp contrast the Trump administration estimates of the Office of Management and Budget are for it to drop to 65% based on rosier estimates of 2% inflation, 3% growth for the decade ahead. Experts say this is unlikely once the Fed raises interest rates and the unemployment rate currently at 4.4% leads to rising inflation, undercutting growth which has remained below 2% for a long period. These concerns are also voiced by Hilsenrath in the WSJ based on the experience of other countries such a Britain that cut corporate taxes without seeing an uptick in economic growth. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Ron Johnson (R-Wisconsin) who seeks deeper spending cuts, Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) who sees Medicaid co pay for able bodied at 100% of federal poverty level as a "sick tax," Lisa Murkowski who differs on taxing providers, and other Congressmen and Women in the Republican party are opposing the new tax cut package of president Trump. Senator Rand Paul (R- Kentucky opposes the raising of the debt ceiling, and is also opposed.

Most of the main Medicaid cuts come after 2029 after Trump no longer is president, so that Republicans who want to see the shrinking of the Medicaid program so it meets only needs of the most needy, want to see faster cuts while Trump is president. And there are other Republicans in Congress who face tight elections and see big risks of losing their seats.

 

LyrArc Article Gist
Senator McCain's vote for the Republican tax bill is uncertain, says this report in NYT. McCain opposed the 2001 and 2003 Bush administration tax cuts on the grounds of benefiting the rich and not doing enough for the middle class. McCain is known to oppose large spending that aggravates the deficit, and the current Republican plan would add $1.5 trillion to the deficit. In 2003 McCain said on the Senate floor he could not support the use of "billions of federal dollars to cut taxes for our nation's wealthiest." How will he vote this time? Holtz-Eakin, his policy adviser in the 2008 campaign says he is not sure, it all depends on what is better, the status quo or this change. 

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in the WSJ confirms other commentary and reporting in different media sources that the Republican Tax Law lacks popular support. It cites the latest WSJ/NBC poll showing deep skepticism about the law on whether as Republicans claim the middle class benefits from this tax cut. More than two thirds in the survey, including 68% of independents, see the law as giving tax cuts mostly to the wealthy and corporations. This is higher than other polls taken before the bill was passed. As little as 17% say their family would get a tax cut. A previous poll showed this at 25%, showing that as Americans look at it more closely it is raising more questions about fairness. This makes Republicans face a steep climb as they try to convince people to the contrary.

LyrArc Article Gist
The U.S. Senate voted 51 to 49 on a Democratic party measure for further reductions in 2012 Social Security payroll taxes for workers and employers, including a surtax on incomes over $1 million. A measure supported by the Republican party to pay for the payroll tax cut by reducing the Federal payrolls was defeated, with half the Republicans voting against it. Democrats hope to use this issue to show Republicans favor the rich over the middle class, as the payroll tax cut benefits most Americans. Polls show Americans by a large majority see Republican policies favoring the rich. A New York Times/CBS poll in October showed 7 of 10 Americans feel this way. Pollster Geoff Garin says the income inequality issue is beginning to override other issues including antigovernment feeling. This is one way in which the Occupy Wall Street Movement's slogan of "the 99 percent" has resonated with U.S. public opinion. The Democratic party sees this as an opportunity to define the campaign issues for 2012, with Republicans running for reelection cautious about being seen this way....

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
The Republican tax bill that passed the House and Senate in Dec. 2017 is likely to increase the deficit in the range of about $516 billion according to Tax Foundation or $ 1trillion according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation, after boost to growth is included. This time in an effort to get a win Republicans cast aside doubts about the effects on the deficit to get it passed. During the Obama years tax legislation failed to get Republican support because of impact on deficits. The reluctance of president Obama to touch the deductions as proposed by the Simpson-Bowles Commission showed the politically cautious approach taken by Obama.  The new bill was examined by the NYT for its impact on various income groups. For people making over $50,000 over 80% get a cut in taxes, about 10% see no difference and the rest see increase in taxes. This goes up by a few percentage points to 84-85% in cuts for people making over 200,000 to $ 1 million, and drops to 80% for over $1 million incomes. About 20% see an increase in taxes for incomes over $1 million.  As evidence of how the tax bill impacts in greater detail this is not provided by the NYT, and shows that the impact of the bill is still not fully understood.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Liz Goodwin and Riley Beggin report from Hillard Ohio where Amazon is building a large data center using land adjoining a school and a park for children. Parents are collecting signatures for a ban. About 70% of Americans are opposed to the data centers building in their local area, after an aggressive push with tax breaks and incentives provided by some states. Virginia, Georgia, Texas, and Ohio most aggressive data center builders in the US by 2026- construction jobs, and investment, as pros, electricity usage and use of farmland cons. Ohio's governor DeWine paused tax breaks after realizing that it cost the state $1 billion in lost revenue. Amazon says it has invested $70 billion in the state since 2016. Democrat politicians are not taking up the bans because of some unions supporting the data centers for jobs created in construction. Another reason is that politicians in general face attacks from the tech companies donating to campaigns against them if they call for a ban. Sherrod Brown Democrat in Ohio asks data centers to pay for their electricity but has not supported a ban-  “With data centers, we make sure the investors pay for electricity. Not the people who live in Zanesville or Coshocton or in Cambridge.” The big reason to support it from the jobs perspective is stated by the unions. Tim Burga of the AFL-CIO in Ohio says-  “These are creating good union jobs, both in the construction, but also in the keeping them secure and maintaining them."  Now you have a public frustrated particularly in quiet suburbs of America who see this as an intrusion into their lives, which means Republican and Democrat, Red State and Blue State, makes little difference. Construction workers and unions excited about the prospects for decent jobs after the Obama and Bush elites shipped 5 million jobs (Lighthizer USTR estimate) to China over 2000-2016, and transferred $20 trillion in American wealth to foreign countries by blindly accepting unfair trade with China, EU, Canada, Mexico. And see this as part of the MAGA effort to bring back the supply chains to America for all manufactured products in the interests of reliable supply, national security, and the promise of good paying jobs for the communities across America that depended on these jobs since the industrial revolution inthe US at the turn of the century in 1900. It took only 2 decades to wipe them out under what Lighthizer and Jamieson call "shortsighted leadership" of  Republican Bush and Democrat Obama and their corresponding elites. These communities were hit more than once, twice, thrice, four times in fact- in 2009 by the banker's aided and abetted financial crisis, by Bush starting and Obama continuing the Afghan Iraq wars on different pretexts (diverting trillions of dollars that otherwise go to job creation and manufacturing, new technologies), and then by Covid in 2019. This is the America in which the data center building spree is taking place- a plus if done right and with some carefully thought out plan for water/electricity usage costs and for AI guardrails, protection for farmland and areas near parks and schools, and residential suburbs.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two law school professors at Fordham University, Kysar and Sugin, say the Republican tax bill is extreme because it was not based on working with Democrats. As a result not a single Democrat supported this tax legislation. The problem- when the Republicans lose their majority in Congress- a serious possibility after the loss in a Senate race in deep red state Alabama- the whole issue of tax legislation would come up again. This is not without precedent as the Democrats won the presidential election in 2008 and Republicans made a sweeping victory in Congress in 2010.This is why Senators Casey and Wyden (Democrats) and Orrin Hatch (Republican) head of the Finance Committee stated on the floor of the Senate on Dec. 19, 2017, that the next time and in future both parties need to engage in real discussion on taxes. The lack of serious discussion on the health care bill passed by Obama in 2008 has created some of the same problems today that this tax bill passed in a similar way without discussion with the other party is likely to face by 2019. No one needs to look further to realize that the political system is failing in its job of grappling and solving the nation's problems. Kysar and Sugin say this bill is like the 1981 tax cuts skewed towards high income Americans which failed to generate economic growth as intended an led to a swift reversal with tax increases in 1982 and years that followed in 1983, 1984. President Obama failed to address tax reform after appointing the Bowles Commission and not taking up its recommendations to reduce deductions. Another effort at changing the system was made without serious debate, a kind of Republican response to the way Democrats passed the Affordable Care healthcare bill in 2008. Real changes to update the tax laws may be put off till both parties can wrap their hands around the problem together. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Republicans and Democrats decided to tackle the U.S. fiscal cliff in several steps. The first step for the Bush tax cuts to be extended to single earners with income under $400,000, and couples earning under $450,000 was part of the agreement reached Jan. 1, 2013. Republicans see this as protecting small business owners who generate jobs in the U.S. economy. Democrats see this as progress in taxing the wealthy to reduce spending cuts in other programs. As expected the deal was reached between Senate colleagues Republican Mitch McConnell and former Democratic senator and Vice President Joe Biden, as rapport is missing in the relationship between Speaker Boehner and president Obama. The $110 fiscal cliff spending cuts on entitlements and defence will be postponed for 2 months till early March under the deal. Debt ceiling will not be raised and negotiations will be needed again by the end of Feb. 2013 to raise the debt ceiling. By March 27, 2013 short term funding measures lapse. Republicans see accepting tax cuts on the wealthy as a way to remove this issue in future negotiations to focus on spending cuts needed to improve U.S. finances. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
House Democrats in the U.S. see the Republican health care plan making the same mistakes in 2017 that the Democrats made in 2008. With the passage of the bill in the House of Representatives with a vote margin on May 4, 2017, rushed through in the way the Obama bill was also rushed through, the nation remains as divided as ever on the issue of health care. The Republicans favoring limiting subsidies and cutting Medicaid, and using some of the savings for a tax cut. The Democrats favoring mandated coverage for all and large subsidies to reduce the number of uninsured Americans, with expansion of Medicaid for very low incomes. Democrats in the House say the Republican House bill will result in Republicans losing seats in the House in midterm elections.

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
John Harwood provides an insight into the polarized positions of each side in the negotiations and the changes in the national scene that have led to a polarized political climate and a polarized Congress. The political positions on the Republican and Democratic sides in Congress and the Senate are different from any other time in many decades of government. Between Tea party members of the House and Pelosi Democrats in the House there is a serious divide. The senior leaders of each party command less support. Consider the loud "no" given by newly elected House Republicans led by Rep. Cantor to Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell's backup plan. The written pledge for no tax increases has given the Cantor House Republicans little room for compromise. And as Harwood points out each side, the tea party House Republican group, the Democrats in Congress, and the President, all know there is every chance that they could be voted out of office in 2012.The media is also splintered with vocal positions on either side. As Senator Chambliss of the Gang of Six Senators said on a talk show a week before the August 2 deadline for raising the U.S. debt ceiling: "Frankly, we don't know what's going to happen for sure." ...

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
A Trump-Vance nomination with its huge tariffs inside a Republican shell with its preference for tax cuts is with a large degree of certainty likely to put America further behind China, slipping even further by a decade. And slipping in renewable energy and in meeting the aspirations of ordinary Americans. Most of the public does not realize that Trump-Vance 60% tariffs and Republican preference for tax cuts over infrastructure spending would create inflation and lack of growth in a Trump-Vance second term. Things would get worse because of the contradictions existing in the choice of tariff preferring Trump in a Republican party that sees tax cuts not infrastructure spending -even when desperately needed- as the answer to every economic problem. Without a clear policy of making the trillion dollar investments in the US economy, in manufacturing, in renewable energy, in chips and science, as it has under Biden the US under Trump-Vance policies would have two serious problems- first it would revive inflation. 60% tariffs on Chinese imports and 10% tariffs on other nations proposed by Trump-Vance would increase inflation. In the absence of the infrastructure investment that Biden has put in place it would create both a lack of growth for the jobs missing that come from infrastructure that is badly needed in a aging dilapidated infrastructure economy, and the inflation that the high tariffs would engineer. The benefits would not be great if China chooses to find other ways to conduct business and continues to keep its currency at levels that promote its exports. Even today Chinese products enter the US through other countries or when China builds factories in the US as Japan has done. The Republican aversion to tackling Chinese industrial challenges in the same way that China does by actively supporting American manufacturers would give China another decade of advantage as America slips even further behind in chips, science and manufacturing. This is the real problem in mixing Trump-Vance to the Republican philosophies on the economy which are not right for this point in time whatever their merits may have been in the 1980's when America was the industrial leader in the world.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
For groceries cost limiting Trump proposes nothing. It was found in the EU that there was excessive price action by grocery stores in 2022 and 2023. Though experts say no for price setting by government, the deterrent effect of a policy of the government to not set prices but to send a clear message about excessive profit as anti-social behavior, has beneficial impact for price reduction or future price increases to be put on hold. Harris will do this. For child care costs. Trump proposes nothing and does not put children as the next generation of Americans at the top of priorities. Harris puts children as the top priority and early years development as critical. Harris proposes a child tax credit of $6000 per family that would cost $110 billion per year estimate from Office for Responsible Budget, offset by Medicare savings achieved by negotiating with Pharma of $36 billion a year, tax on billionaires at 25% instead of 8.2% saving $40 billion a year, for net cost of $44 billion a year the Harris $6000 Child Tax Credit.  Congress including Democrats failed to extend the $3600 tax credit per child below 6 years that was introduced after 2019 yet allowed to expire in 2022 reverting to $2000 per child under 6 years. The concept is accepted as helping children, Vance the Republican VP nominee has suggested $5000, only opposed by country club Republicans oblivious to the importance of children having free school lunches and parents having the money for child care added costs for the future of the children of this Nation.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Eric Cantor is the senior Republican leader in the House of Representatives. He is a key figure in the negotiations with the Obama White House over the budget, deficit reduction, and raising the debt ceiling. Cantor and House Speaker Boehner are leading the negotiations on the Republican side. Cantor rejects any compromise on tax increases. He told reporters: "I think behind this notion of 'We want shared sacrifice' that they continue to say means 'We want to raise taxes,' and we don't accept that we raise taxes in an economy like this." Cantor is a lawyer and a former state legislator from a district that covers the Richmond, Virginia, suburbs. He was elected in 2000. Through his "Young Guns" program Cantor recruited many of the 87 new Republicans who were elected in 2010. It is this support from rank and file Congressman that has propelled Cantor into a leadership position for the deficit talks. Responding to critics that say a compromise is needed from both sides in the talks, Cantor says- "I don't think the White House understands how difficult it is for fiscal conservatives to say they are going to vote for a debt-ceiling increase." On June 23, Cantor pulled out of talks with the White House. In the current round of negotiations Boehner pulled back from "a grand bargain" which included tax increases, after consulting with Cantor....