<$BlogRSDURL$>

Tidbits for Political Junkies with Short Attention Spans & Hearty Appetites

|

Friday, June 04, 2004

 

Budget Tap-Dance

According to this item in yesterday's Times, "many Republicans are concluding they would be better off with no budget than with one that would require them to pay the costs of permanently extending last year’s tax cuts."

The reason: “pay as you go” would make it uncomfortably obvious, especially in an election year, just who’s doing the paying:
On Wednesday, two liberal policy research groups released a study estimating that the ultimate cost of the tax cuts would fall overwhelmingly on middle- and lower-income families.

According to the study, by the Tax Policy Center and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, more than three-quarters of all households would end up net losers if the government actually paid for the tax cuts by either spending cuts or other tax increases.

But the wealthiest one-fifth of families, who are by far the biggest beneficiaries of the tax cuts, would end up big winners.

We should think of tax cuts as loans, not grants, and in particular as loans that are not paid back by the same people who get them,” said William G. Gale, a senior economist at the tax policy center.

The rich borrow, and you pay their bills. How's that for class warfare?

|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?