Showing posts with label shared sacrifice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label shared sacrifice. Show all posts

Friday, November 30, 2012

A modest sacrifice for everyone

The president has proposed an opening offer. Congressional Republicans don't like it. The "fiscal cliff" is getting closer, and we're all looking more and more like Thelma and Louise at the movie's end.

Neither the president's proposal nor anything from the Republicans truly solves the problem of uncontrolled deficit spending, which has produced a $16 trillion debt. The Paul Ryan plan doesn't get us to a balanced budget in the foreseeable future. Obama does not have a balanced budget in his crystal ball. The Bowles-Simpson plan does not achieve a balanced budget. Even Warren Buffett suggests that it would be OK if we could just get our revenues to 18% of GDP and our spending to 21% of GDP — but we'd be borrowing 3% of GDP every year.

No one seems to be asking the American people for sacrifice. Obama wants higher taxes on the wealthiest, and it's true that they have fared far better over the past decade of rising debt than the remaining 98% of us. But no one is asking everybody to give something for fiscal solvency.

Here's a modest proposal: Consider raising everybody's income tax rate — individual, corporate, capital gains, all of it — by one percent, or even half of one percent. Make it affect everybody, sort of. Those who pay no federal income tax — and that's a substantial portion of the population (just ask Mitt "47%" Romney) — would have to pay more. One percent added to zero is still zero. But the higher rate would be there, and it would apply to everyone. Obama's focus on increasing tax rates for the wealthiest is not a formula for balancing the budget. His tax increase would bring in less than $1 trillion over 10 years, but we're spending $1 trillion more than we earn every year. The middle class is going to have to pay up if America is ever going to get out from under the debt it rang up fighting two unbudgeted foreign wars, bailing out banks and providing for people who lost their incomes in the Great Recession.

Yes, we should cut spending, and in a bloated federal budget, there are plenty of places to cut. Here again, the pain should be shared. All federal programs should have to sacrifice.

If we begin with the premise that closing the budget deficit is a top priority, we will find a way. If this is just a political tit-for-tat, we'll crash at the bottom of that fiscal cliff.

Friday, April 6, 2012

Compromises necessary to cut deficit, debt

We're seven months from the election, and already both parties have drawn their lines in the sand that will doom the country if there is no compromise. Instead of seeking compromise and finding a middle ground that will save the country from financial ruin, both Democrats and Republicans are gambling the nation's solvency on a double-down bet on the next election.

Both parties are digging in their heels over taxes and spending, each playing to its own core constituency without any apparent willingness to do what is best for the nation as a whole. Since 2000, when the federal budget was balanced (at least in part, if you don't count Social Security obligations) in the final years of the Clinton administration, the federal deficit and federal debt have soared. We are now spending a trillion dollars more than we take in each year! There are many reasons for this: huge tax cuts pushed by President George Bush, two costly wars that were financed "off-budget," increased national security spending in the wake of 9/11, and a staggering recession that reduced tax revenues. And also this: an unwillingness on the part of Congress to address the difficult problem of balancing taxes and spending.

President Obama, who rejected the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction committee that he appointed, has attacked Rep. Paul Ryan's GOP budget plan as destructive. The Ryan plan calls for elimination of unspecified tax breaks while further reducing the tax rate for the wealthiest taxpayers. Obama wants to increase taxes on those earning more than $250,000 a year, and he says Ryan's plan for turning Medicare into a grant program for health insurance premiums would mean the elimination of Medicare.

But here's the key fact about both Ryan's and Obama's plans: Neither would eliminate the federal deficit in the foreseeable future. Ryan's plan reduces the deficit primarily through cuts to Medicare and other social programs and the elimination of tax breaks to be named later. Obama has not proposed a plan that would significantly cut the deficit, and his commitment to not raise taxes on those making less than $250,000 effectively eliminates any hope of raising the large amounts of revenue needed to cut the deficit.

Both parties need to turn back the rhetoric and erase those lines in the sand. Democrats will have to stop portraying themselves as the saviors of Medicare and Social Security and recognize the fact that neither program is sustainable in its present form. Revisions will be necessary to keep the programs solvent. Small adjustments in eligibility age, co-payments, service delivery and payroll taxes could repair these programs with minimal pain. Moreover, every federal program or federal grant to the states, is not effective or efficient. Cutting ineffective programs is just good management. But every program has constituents, and constituents have lobbyists, and Congress does not like to say no to lobbyists.

For their part, Republicans will have to give up their doctrine that tax cuts are the cure for every ill that faces the country. If you're willing to vote for spending programs (and I'm not talking about the debt limit), you have to be willing to vote for the taxes to pay for them. The nation will not be able to cut its way out of this budget deficit simply because Congress will not cut defense spending or Social Security to any significant degree, and it cannot cut interest on debt, which is an increasingly large portion of the total budget.

Instead of lobbing pot shots at each other, the parties need to come together under the principle of shared sacrifice. For Republicans, that means the "job creators" (otherwise known as the wealthy) will have to pay higher taxes. For Democrats, that means the working class or middle class — people making less than $250,000 will see their taxes rise as part of the shared sacrifice. The only way we can cut the deficit is by doing it together. These are sacrifices for the good of the country. Unless compromises can be won, we will all share in the economic despair that is inevitable for a society that cannot stop living beyond its means and whose leaders refuse to compromise.