Tuesday, August 02, 2011

Neither New Taxes Nor Pentagon Cuts

So says Kos, and I buy it.

So Reid says the super committee must have new revenues.
Reid says the tea party's influence on the process has been "unfair to the American people." "The American people are not impressed by the no new revenue...because the richest of the rich have contributed nothing...the burden [in the deal] is on the middle-class." Says the Bush tax cuts did not help the economy. But says we do need to cut spending, and says the Super Congress will force action, and that the Super Congress must include revenue. "We need a fair approach to this committee." "The only way we can arrive at a fair arrangement for the American people is to have equal sharing." He says revenue must match spending cuts (which I think is an absolute minimum standard). "It has to be equal. There has to be spending cuts...and revenue that matches that."
Boehner and McConnell say it won't. Limbaugh and Norquist won't let them.

So then what? Automatic cuts to discretionary spending and the defense budget.

But the GOP won't fret over those defense cuts. Because all they have to do is pass separate legislation refunding the Pentagon and Senate Dems (either too scared or too compromised) will cave on that and what will Obama do? Veto spending "for the troops"?
Not much to add to that. This arrangement would work if Dems had the stones to follow through on their threats. They don't. They NEVER do. So Republicans need not fear.


  1. Anonymous11:41 AM


    And the lesson is?

  2. You can't have equal revenue and spending cuts. Let's say we simply repeal bush tax cuts and return to Clinton era levels, and then match that revenue out of, say, purely defense cuts (a progressive wet dream). We're still no where near getting our deficit under control much less a debt reduction plan.

    Don't get me wrong, that's a good start, but you're not even a quarter of the way there. So the next step is to either go revenue into European levels (won't happen) or reform entitlements. The ratio ends up looking more like 1:4 revenue to cuts (both defense and entitlements).

    Moral of the story is everybody gets a big black eye from that deal, but it's the only deal that puts us on the road to sustainability.

  3. Repealing the Bush tax cuts would go a long way towards sorting out the problem; rebuilding an economy that actually generates income would go a long way farther.

    "Everybody" doesn't get a big black eye from that deal. The wealthiest minority get off scott-free. That's the problem, and if the solution is following Europe's example, then it damned well needs to be MADE to happen.