What's Wrong With the Republican Fiscal Cliff Counteroffer - Bloomberg

[Bill USA]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-03/what-s-wrong-with-the-republican-fiscal-cliff-counteroffer.html

1. It's not really a proposal -- it's just a set of headline numbers without specific policies. The letter says Republicans want to cut $900 billion from mandatory spending and $300 billion from discretionary spending, but they don't say what or how they want to cut. The letter nods toward a proposal sketched out by Erskine Bowles, the cornerstone of which is a gradual increase in the Medicare age, but it lacks specifics.

On the tax side, they agree to $800 billion in new revenue from "pro-growth tax reform that closes special-interest loopholes and deductions while lowering rates." But they don't endorse specific loophole closures or propose a new rate structure.

~~
~~

2. The description of tax reform makes little sense. It's feasible to raise $800 billion from base broadening over ten years, but not to raise $800 billion and finance a significant cut in tax rates. Even if you capped all itemized deductions (including for charity) at $25,000, that would only generate about $1.3 trillion in new revenue, leaving $500 billion available to finance rate cuts.

~~
~~

3. The proposal does not fully avert the fiscal cliff. Republicans describe their proposals as a way to "avert the fiscal cliff." But this proposal would only partly delay the implementation of austerity measures (tax increases and spending cuts) into future years when the economy is stronger.
(more)

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Baffle em with billions

[Bill USA]

2. Lyndon Johnson would have used it for toilet paper and sent it back!

[Lasher]

3. Obama said he was through arguing with himself.

This is a clear attempt by Boner to get him to go back to doing just that. Hope Obama doesn't fall for the trap.

I'm surprised Bloomberg has come up with such an objective analysis. I thought they would fall into line with the GOPee echo chamber. A pleasant surprise.