Krugman nails it!

[taichiliberal]

Paul Krugman is not someone that I agree with all the time, but even he sees the error of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform that Obama approved of. It's one of the reasons why he's lost a lot of confidence and support from the people that elected him:

The Hijacked Commission
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: November 11, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/op...n.html?_r=2&hp

Actually, though, what the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases — tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans — the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest — and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

 

[uscitizen]

Obama is a tool of the corporatists.
He is one of those who thinks if it is good for wall street it is good for America.

Krugman has it about 1/4 figured out which puts him ahead of most of the economic "experts".

 

[Mad Scientist]

All this talk of tax cuts is just more bullshit. The US Government doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem.

 

[loosecannon]

We've known for a long time, then, that nothing good would come from the commission. Wednesday, though, when the co-chairmen released their proposal, it was even worse than the cynics expected.

Start with the declaration of "Our Guiding Principles and Values." Among them is, "Cap revenue at or below 21 (percent) of GDP." This is a guiding principle? And why is a commission charged with finding every possible route to a balanced budget setting an upper (but not lower) limit on revenue?

Matters become clearer once you reach the section on tax reform. The goals of reform, as Bowles and Simpson see them, are presented in the form of seven bullet points. "Lower Rates" is the first point; "Reduce the Deficit" is the seventh.

So how, exactly, did a deficit-cutting commission become a commission whose first priority is cutting tax rates, with deficit reduction literally at the bottom of the list?

Actually, what the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases - tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans - the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest - and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

This proposal clearly represents a major transfer of income upward, from the middle class to a small minority of wealthy Americans. And what does any of this have to do with deficit reduction?

here is a link to the actual article:

Paul Krugman: There’s nothing to like about deficit panel report | Viewpoints, Outlook | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

 

[elvis]

But he won a Nobel Prize. Oh wait, we just found out how significant that feat is.

 

[boedicca]

Krugman is a foaming at the mouth rabid moonbat.

Just frelling stating the obvious.

 

[B. Kidd]

Paul Krugman is not someone that I agree with all the time, but even he sees the error of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform that Obama approved of. It's one of the reasons why he's lost a lot of confidence and support from the people that elected him:

The Hijacked Commission
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: November 11, 2010

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/12/op...n.html?_r=2&hp

Actually, though, what the co-chairmen are proposing is a mixture of tax cuts and tax increases — tax cuts for the wealthy, tax increases for the middle class. They suggest eliminating tax breaks that, whatever you think of them, matter a lot to middle-class Americans — the deductibility of health benefits and mortgage interest — and using much of the revenue gained thereby, not to reduce the deficit, but to allow sharp reductions in both the top marginal tax rate and in the corporate tax rate.

Peter G. Peterson, founder of the the Foundation (founded only in 2008) of the same name is a prime mover behind the extra-legislative budget commission.
Who is Peter G. Peterson?
Billionaire former head of a private equity company called the Blackstone Group. He sold his shares to the public just before the economic crash. Peter Peterson is also a major player behind the Concord Coalition which is a leading deficit-hawk organization.

Should social security ever be privatized, it would be a massive source of new profits for him and other Wall St. financial firms.
Deficit hawks are not necessarily our(Main St.) friends.
Krugman knows this.

 

[B. Kidd]

Also, alot of those new pro-deficit reduction commercials starting to hit the national airwaves this week are financed by the Peter G. Peterson Foundation (read the small print at the bottom of the commercials).

 

[taichiliberal]

Obama is a tool of the corporatists.
He is one of those who thinks if it is good for wall street it is good for America.

Krugman has it about 1/4 figured out which puts him ahead of most of the economic "experts".

I wouldn't go as far as "tool", but he needs to get his head out of his ass by thinking his "right of center" policy is going to properly deal with the mess we are in.

 

[taichiliberal]

All this talk of tax cuts is just more bullshit. The US Government doesn't have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem.

The government has a LACK of revenue because of LACK of proper taxing. Major corporations that are NOT paying their full share of income tax....tax breaks for folk WHO WOULD STILL BE RICH WITHOUT THOSE TAX BREAKS. And lets not forget that for 8 years you had an illegal invasion/occupation that was kept OFF THE BOOKS....a major spending problem that the GOP just don't want to deal with.

 

[taichiliberal]

But he won a Nobel Prize. Oh wait, we just found out how significant that feat is.

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

 

[elvis]

But he won a Nobel Prize. Oh wait, we just found out how significant that feat is.

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

 

[taichiliberal]

Krugman is a foaming at the mouth rabid moonbat.

Just frelling stating the obvious.

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

 

[taichiliberal]

But he won a Nobel Prize. Oh wait, we just found out how significant that feat is.

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

Really? Where's the quote on that and in what context was that quote? I'll wait.

 

[The Infidel]

But he won a Nobel Prize. Oh wait, we just found out how significant that feat is.

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

Obama is doing his bestest....

 

[elvis]

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

Really? Where's the quote on that and in what context was that quote? I'll wait.

I apologize. Not tripled. nearly doubled.

Krugman Says U.S., EU Stimulus Should Be 4% of GDP (Update1) - Bloomberg

 

[taichiliberal]

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

Really? Where's the quote on that and in what context was that quote? I'll wait.

I apologize. Not tripled. nearly doubled.

Krugman Says U.S., EU Stimulus Should Be 4% of GDP (Update1) - Bloomberg

Actually, this is what he said:

......My back of the envelope says on both sides of the Atlantic we should be having a stimulus that peaks at 4 percent of GDP annually,” Krugman told a press conference in Brussels today. “The United States is not doing enough to fight the crisis and Europe is doing a bit less than half as much as the United States.”

....Krugman said the stimulus efforts should “peak at about $600 billion on a one-year basis” in the U.S. Europe’s program should be “something similar,” peaking at around $500 billion, he said.

“This is vastly bigger than anything on the table,” Krugman said. “The U.S. stimulus package is $800 billion over three years; it should be $1.3 trillion and the Europeans should be doing the same thing.”

 

[taichiliberal]

So you can't logically fault the man's writing, but you feel compelled to spew childish sour grapes instead. Sad.

He thinks we should triple the deficit. That better?

Obama is doing his bestest....

Pity you can't.

 

[Revere]

Government is already 22% of GDP, and going higher every year. Why isn't that working?

 

[taichiliberal]

Government is already 22% of GDP, and going higher every year. Why isn't that working?

Outsourcing, Wall St. and bank mortgage chicanery, an invasion/occupation kept off the books, large corporations NOT paying full taxes on income.....take your pick.