Borosage writes: "You can't fix the debt without fixing the economy. And deficit reduction won't fix the economy."
President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner. (photo: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images)
4 Reasons the Fiscal Cliff Is Worse Than It Looks
02 January 13
arly this morning, the Senate passed the fiscal cliff deal by 89-8, a margin virtually guaranteeing that it will survive in the House. The deal has some good parts. It lets the Bush tax cuts expire on the wealthy, raises the estate tax marginally and increases taxes on capital gains and dividends a bit. Unemployment benefits are extended for a year. Tax boosts for the low paid workers – the child tax credit, expanded earned income credit, refundable tuition tax credits – are extended, if only for five years. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are not touched.
But no one should be fooled. This is an ugly deal, with foul implications for the coming months.
- Setting Up the Next Extortion
- Hiking Taxes for Working Americans; A Million Jobs Lost
- Compromising the Compromising President
- Feeding the Deficit Distraction
The most ominous part of the deal is what was left out. The deal makes no provision for lifting the debt ceiling. It postpones the sequester (automatic cuts in domestic and military spending) for only two months. It is a smaller deficit reduction package than that originally sought by the president. It therefore sets up the right-wing House zealots to hold the economy hostage once more, while demanding deep cuts in public services (known as cuts in domestic spending), backed by a media frenzy about deficits. And while Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid escaped unscathed in this deal, they will be the prime targets in the coming debate.
By allowing the payroll tax cut to expire, every working American gets a tax hike of 2% of their income (up to about $113,000 in income). A worker making $50,000 a year will pay an extra $1,000 in taxes. Payroll checks will be cut. Belts will have to be tightened even more. That will lower demand, producing job loss totaling up to an estimated million jobs. (Taxes on the wealthy go up also, but those have only marginal effects on jobs).
President Obama sensibly told Republicans that he would not sign any bill or agree to any deal that extended the Bush tax cuts on those making over $250,000. He had stumped on that across the country on this pledge and received a mandate from the voters. Polls showed the majority of Americans were with him. With all the Bush tax breaks due to expire, Republicans were faced with letting taxes go up on everyone just to defend tax breaks for the richest Americans. The President began the negotiations saying this was not negotiable. He could not have been in a stronger position.
But he chose to compromise. The Bush tax cuts will be allowed to expire on couples making over $450,000. This costs about $150-200 billion in revenue over 10 years. The president argues he got the important extension of unemployment insurance and the working poor tax credits in return. But these could have been folded into a package after going over the cliff. And the cost to the president is significant. Once more Republicans have learned that obstruction works, that the president will always blink.
The next extortion – the debt ceiling, automatic sequester – in the next eight weeks makes this a big deal. The President says sensibly that he will not negotiate over lifting the debt ceiling. Period. And now there is even less reason for the Republicans to believe him than before. This encourages extreme demands rather than discouraging them. This was the time to draw the line.
The deal is already being denounced in the mainstream media as “too timid,” offering too little in deficit reduction. It guarantees the next eight weeks will be fixated on the debate about what to cut and how much to cut headed into the debt ceiling.
But this entire debate is wrong-headed. You can’t fix the debt without fixing the economy. And deficit reduction won’t fix the economy. The recovery is too slow and too skewed to put people back to work. Deficit reduction can only slow it further.
We need a big and bold debate about fundamental reforms needed to make this economy work for working people. That includes making big investments vital to our future at a time when we can borrow for virtually nothing – rebuilding and modernizing our decrepit infrastructure, funding R&D, doing at least the basics in education. We need to balance our trade, and revive manufacturing, beginning with capturing a leading role in the global move to clean energy.
We need to address inequality frontally. That requires much more than small marginal increases in taxes for millionaires. It includes raising the minimum wage, empowering workers to organize and bargain for a fair share of the profits they help to generate, limiting perverse CEO compensation schemes. It includes a financial transaction tax that might curb Wall Street gambling.
We need to continue health care reform, taking on the entrenched lobbies — the drug and insurance companies, the private hospital complexes — that drive up our medical costs. If we paid per capita what other industrial countries pay for health care, we’d project surpluses as far as the eye can see. We have to fix our broken health care system.
But Washington is talking about none of this. Instead the Congress and the President are going to continue to debate how much more to cut from public services as if that would fix the economy. That debate is likely to turn foul. Republicans use the debt ceiling to demand structural cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. They’ll likely be willing to repeal or dilute the sequester as an incentive to focus on the core security programs. And they’ll be convinced that the president will fold once more.
Americans are struggling with mass unemployment, declining wages, increasing insecurity, Gilded Age inequality. Trimming the deficit addresses none of these, and is likely to slow growth, making things worse.
We’ve had an ugly debate leading to a wretched agreement. And that agreement only insures that the debate will get uglier.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Just in case you need an example in math – hope this is comprehendible enough for the millions that do not even understand what a Trillion is. Boy walks into Ice Cream store, and orders a 3 scoop ice cream cone. Caver-In-Chief gives him the cone and says that will be $1.60 and the boy says no way I will pay 80 cents, so Caver-In-Chief says okkkkkkkkk 60 cents it is. Now Caver-In-Chief needs to get at least $1.10 for that ice cream cone to just pay the bills and that is why the US is going to be just like Greece in a very short time.
That is where they all miss the boat. The Big Wigs structure their finances to avoid "income" for which the average tax rate was ca. 24%; meanwhile the BW's got 15% rates on capital gains.
Money is money.
It is argued that the Bigs create jobs with all these tax privileges they get--so where are those jobs under the hardshell, low-taxes on the rich policy that has been in effect for 10 years?
It's patter intended to delude low-information folks whether voters or not.
if you mean piddling help to working people who have been screwed over by bankers and CEOs, than you are dead wrong
I'm still waiting for someone to convince me that a one year extension of unemployment benefits, and income taxes not going up for everyone below $250,000 is a bad thing...sure the number is $450,000, but last time I checked people making below 250 are included in people below 450.
The big fight is about to come but Obama did get a tax hike on the rich without agreeing to any cuts.
Then deploy a force the size of the TSA? Then triple the border patrol? Again, unless we start doing some math about spending and less revenue and embrace what we created, which requires finding solutions it will only grow worse.
Please -- 'DemocratIC' Party .... Using the noun 'Democrat' as an adjective is one of those Rovian put-down frameworks that objective people should avoid. It smacks of snarky hayseed, and is just downright rude.
CEOs of big corporations, wear the same
outfit: white shirt, tie, pinstriped suit
and cufflings.
Bvadrr !
I far prefer female power, with miniskirt, high heels and big boobs,
or female power with long skirts, low heels, and no boobs.
When will we have "Pussy Riot" in the US?
a pussy power group of strong women, making a performance on the stairs of Capitol Hill.
We need a change, I am a man, but I am
tired of men, we need some pussy revolution ! Come on girls !
I am with you all the way.
All they do actually is rule and when they do run government, it is into the ground.
I have long thought that we need to send our mother's (exempting th 5% lunatic factor) to D.C. to straighten this mess out.
Mother's make the kids quit fighting, won't (except the M. Thatchers send their boys to war), work at stringing out the budget from payday to payday even managing to eek in a goodie now and then no matter how tight the budget is.
Mother's will also use their verbalization skills, which are superior to those of males (not a jibe, a fact) to communicate with each other and will attempt to work out a consenus if at all possible.
What have we got to loose except a confederacy of dunces?
We would have a lot to LOSE, with loose cannons like those in DC.
You weren't invited to the table?
Too bad. So sad.
But expand the analogy more appropriately. You are not a guest at the table, but an owner of the establishment.
How are you with being stiffed again?
If President Obama is too much the Wall Street/Harvard man to agree to that, then let's not blame the dumb GOPers for the crisis--lets blame the dumb progressives who got conned by Wall Street's Obama.
And that austerity never causes prosperity--reg ardless of whether the austerity was proposed by the pro-Wall Street Speaker Boehner or the pro-Wall Street President Obama.
Maybe Wall Street rigged the 'fiscal cliff' argument so they could loot the budget--and escape responsibility? ?
RSS feed for comments to this post