Skip to content
The Browns Board
Theme
  • System
  • Light
  • Dark
  • Login
  • Register
  • Forums
  • Recent
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Donate
  1. Home
  2. Political Discussion
  3. To Tax or not To Tax ?

To Tax or not To Tax ?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Political Discussion
2 Posts 1 Posters 408 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • BrownIndian BrownIndianB
    • 2k Posts
    • 39 Reputation
    BrownIndianB BrownIndian wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Best-case scenarios for health reform would reduce the growth rate in health care costs by 1.5 percentage points a year. Even Obama economic adviser Christina Romer has said that won't be easy to achieve.

    Gale and Auerbach estimate that for health cost savings alone to stabilize the debt-to-GDP ratio over time, the growth rate in health costs would need to be slowed by 3 percentage points a year -- for 75 years.

    "The issue is certainly health care, but the issue is a lot more than health care," Gale said. "Our fiscal books are fundamentally out of balance."

    A big reason, Gale and Auerbach say, are the tax cuts and spending increases put into place since 2001.

    One way to measure the imbalance is to consider the "fiscal gap" -- which is a measure of the difference between revenue and outlays over the long term.

    Under Obama's budget, Gale and Auerbach estimate the fiscal gap would be 9% of GDP. Conceptually, that means to restore fiscal balance over the long-term the federal government would need to increase taxes by 9% of GDP or cut spending by that amount starting now and lasting "until the end of time," Gale said.

    For some context, consider that in a normal year, the country gets tax revenue equal to about 9% of GDP.

    Obama has promised to make permanent the tax cuts for everyone except high-income households. It's an expensive promise. The federal coffers will see roughly $2.1 trillion less in revenue over the next 10 years than it would if the tax cuts expired for everyone, according to estimates from the Joint Committee on Taxation.

    "The [Obama administration] gave away a huge pot of money. [it was] a gargantuan missed opportunity," said Charles Konigsberg, chief budget counsel of the Concord Coalition, a deficit watchdog group.

    1 Reply Last reply
    Quote Reply
    • BrownIndian BrownIndianB
      • 2k Posts
      • 39 Reputation
      BrownIndianB BrownIndian wrote on last edited by
      #2

      That extract came from -> http://money.cnn.com/2009/07/01/news/econo...sion=2009070108

      so a simple question - Should Obama listen to the watch dog group and tax appropriately so that we do not lose the 2.1 trillion dollars ?

      1 Reply Last reply
      Quote Reply

      Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

      Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

      With your input, this post could be even better 💗

      Register Login
      Reply
      • Reply as topic
      Log in to reply
      • Oldest to Newest
      • Newest to Oldest
      • Most Votes


      Theme
      • System
      • Light
      • Dark
      The Browns Board Terms Privacy

      The Browns Board is an independent fan community. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the Cleveland Browns, Cleveland Cavaliers, Cleveland Guardians, the NFL, NBA, MLB, or any of their affiliates. Team names, logos, and other marks are the property of their respective owners.

      • First post
        Last post
      0
      • Forums
      • Recent
      • Popular
      • Users
      • Donate