Paul Ryan has responded to the proposal (
Ryan: Obama's 'Buffe
tt Rule' is class warfare), using arguments predictable enough that many in this thread have anticipated them. He calls it "class warfare" and "bad economics", and says that it will lead to more uncertainty and fewer jobs.
Obama's proposal is clearly good politics. By asking only that millionaires pay at least the same percentage of their income as less wealthy Americans, he places the "fairness" argument firmly on his side. As we saw during the debates over extending the Bush tax cuts, the American people firmly support new taxes on the wealthy. Given the new emphasis on deficit reduction, that support has probably gone up (although perhaps not). As an added bonus, Republican candidates for President will probably have to take some sort of position now, which they largely avoided during the debt ceiling debates.
Economically, the plan also makes perfect sense (except in that it doesn't go far enough):
-- Raising taxes on the wealthy relative to the nonwealthy shifts consumption towards necessities and away from luxuries
-- Taxing investment income as normal income removes the distortionary effect which favors the financial sector. I think we recall the consequences of a too-large financial sector.
-- Demonstrating a willingness to use new revenues to pay for current debts will send a signal that the US is (more) serious about deficit reduction.
The one downside of course is that Ryan is quite right that higher taxes do reduce overall economic activity. Given the weak economy, this may not be the time to raise taxes. However, there is no harm in agreeing now to raise taxes in the future, which seems to be what Obama is trying to do anyway.