Krugman: The Sweet Spot

[priller]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/17/opinion/17KRUG.html

"What we have here is a form of looting." So says George Akerlof, a Nobel laureate in economics, of the Bush administration's budget policies — and he's right...

...the administration's tax cuts are, in a fundamental sense, phony, because the government is simply borrowing to make up for the loss of revenue. In 2004, the typical family will pay about $700 less in taxes than it would have without the Bush tax cuts — but meanwhile, the government will run up about $1,500 in debt on that family's behalf.

George W. Bush is like a man who tells you that he's bought you a fancy new TV set for Christmas, but neglects to tell you that he charged it to your credit card, and that while he was at it he also used the card to buy some stuff for himself. Eventually, the bill will come due — and it will be your problem, not his.

--
The sad truth...

[RamboLiberal]

1. Krugman makes a good point about the Repug bashing point

the Repugs put in to the tax cut. I hope Dean and other Dem candidates will listen. We certainly saw whore Russert beat Dean over the head on that infamous MTP with this point.

These middle-class tax cuts were designed to create a "sweet spot" that would allow the administration to point to "typical" families that received big tax cuts. If a middle-income family had two or more children 17 or younger, and an income just high enough to take full advantage of the provisions, it did get a significant tax cut. And such families played a big role in selling the overall package.

So if a Democratic candidate proposes a total rollback of the Bush tax cuts, he'll be offering an easy target: administration spokespeople will be able to provide reporters with carefully chosen examples of middle-income families who would lose $1,500 or $2,000 a year from tax-cut repeal. By leaving the child tax credits and the cutout in place while proposing to repeal the rest, contenders will recapture most of the revenue lost because of the tax cuts, while making the job of the administration propagandists that much harder.

[Nancy Waterman]

2. The Democrats in Congress

worked really hard to get the middle class part of the tax cut in. I think that is one reason Kerry is so adamant about not revoking them.

But an important point that few address is that even with a Democratic president, it will be hard to get rid of these tax cuts due to the Republican House and the Cockroach Killer.

[RamboLiberal]

3. I agree with that but it will be fun to watch them shutdown the

Federal government again in a hissy fit.