Another day older and deeper in debt

[traderx]

.

Excerpt from Fiscal Poison Pill by Paul Krugman 6/16/08:

?.................... As I read the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center?s analysis of the presidential candidates? tax proposals, I realized that the tax cuts enacted by the Bush administration are, in effect, a fiscal poison pill aimed at future administrations.

True, the tax cuts won?t prevent a change in management ? the Constitution sees to that. But they will make it hard for the next president to change the country?s direction.

Exhibit A of the poison pill in action is the sad case of John McCain, part of whose lingering image as a maverick rests on his early opposition to the Bush tax cuts, which he declared excessive and too tilted toward the rich.

Since then the budget surpluses of the Clinton years have given way to persistent deficits, and income inequality has risen to new heights, vindicating his opposition.

But instead of pointing this out, Mr. McCain now promises to make those tax cuts permanent ? and proposes further cuts that are, if anything, tilted even more toward the wealthy. And how is the loss of revenue to be made up? Mr. McCain hasn?t offered a realistic answer............................................

.......... Barack Obama?s tax plan is more responsible than Mr. McCain?s: relative to current policy, the Tax Policy Center estimates, the Obama plan would raise revenue by $700 billion over the next decade, compared with a $600 billion loss for Mr. McCain.
The Obama plan is also far more progressive, sharply reducing after-tax incomes for the richest 1 percent of Americans while raising incomes for the bottom 80 percent.
But while $700 billion may sound like a lot of money, it?s probably not enough to pay for universal health care, which was supposed to be the overriding progressive priority in this election....................................?

Link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/16/o...14280000&en=cb5a963b0a3b88d2&ei=5070&emc=eta1
.

When an ultra-liberal like Paul Krugman refers to the Tax Policy Center as "nonpartisan" we have a new paradigm: if it is liberal, call it nonpartisan.

 

[6thGen]

When an ultra-liberal like Paul Krugman refers to the Tax Policy Center as "nonpartisan" we have a new paradigm: if it is liberal, call it nonpartisan.

I was thinking that Bush should have raised taxes just to get Krugman and the NYT to support lower taxes. I'm still not sure McCain won't for that exact reason.

 

[30ashopper]

.

Excerpt from Fiscal Poison Pill by Paul Krugman 6/16/08:

.......... Barack Obama’s tax plan is more responsible than Mr. McCain’s: relative to current policy, the Tax Policy Center estimates, the Obama plan would raise revenue by $700 billion over the next decade, compared with a $600 billion loss for Mr. McCain.

The Obama plan is also far more progressive, sharply reducing after-tax incomes for the richest 1 percent of Americans while raising incomes for the bottom 80 percent.

But while $700 billion may sound like a lot of money, it’s probably not enough to pay for universal health care, which was supposed to be the overriding progressive priority in this election....................................”
.

I read that, Krugman does a nice job of spinning Obama's plan in a positive light. Note he neglects to mention the added 3.3 trillion in debt, and the fact that the survey didn't include the conservatively estimated $630 billion in added healthcare spending. It's interesting to note, the raise in SS taxes matches perfectly what Obama plans to spend on healthcare. Coincidence? Doubtful.

Krugman very delicately points out at the end of the article that there is a significant shortfall in Obama's plan. He also makes a suggestion in a very round-about way - more revenue will be needed to cover that debt, and more tax increases will solve the problem.

I wouldn't expect much more coverage than this from the MSM as I firmly believe they are in the bag with Obama and want to see him elected.