The bottom line is that extending tax cuts to those making over $250K really does not offer much bang for the deficit buck. Yet, while Republicans get to rail against the deficit, they get a free pass from everyone on the how their proposal to make all tax cuts permanent would cause the national debt to explode without cuts to defense, social security or medicare, which they have have also said they would not touch.
My take is that liberals need to seize the narrative and stop being afraid to discuss the deficit, because the deficit needs to be discussed whenever the issue of taxes are discussed. We have easily bought into the narrative that the deficit only matters when spending on infrastructure or social programs are being discussed, but it does not matter when defense spending or tax cuts are discussed.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=12258078
On this, economists agree: Extending tax cuts passed under President George W. Bush for low- and middle-income people would strengthen the weak economy.
The question is what to do about the highest-paid 3 percent of taxpayers. Should Congress let their tax cuts expire at year's end as scheduled? Extend them for only a while? Or make them permanent?
It isn't just a debate over how much money high-income Americans should get to keep. It's about how much their tax cuts might aid the economy. And how much they'll affect the budget deficit years from now.
But first, consider what would happen next year if Congress let the tax cuts for everyone expire as scheduled. According to Moody's Analytics, the deficit would drop to $732 billion. That's well below the $1.3 trillion deficit for the budget year that ended Sept. 30.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
