The latter years of the 10 yr budget window contemplate a deficit of 3% of GDP, which is a welcome flight from the usual hysteria to reasonability. It's more a political statement, since the 'out-years' of budgets don't mean much. The stuff to watch are the measures that are permanent, which would include the scheduled tax increases.
I forgot to mention they ding the oil companies pretty well on the tax side too. On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 4:07 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Max B. Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote: >> I've started looking at the O-budget numbers, which are pretty >> remarkable overall. I mean the humongous jump in non-defense >> spending. Some kool stuff on the tax side too (cap and trade, >> tax on hedge funds, cap deductions at 28%). It makes me think >> of the LBJ mix -- big growth in domestic spending, and sliding >> into a potential foreign policy morass (in Afghanistan). > > > > I thought there was a lot to like in the Obama budget: elimination of > Bush tax cuts including I assume reinstating the estate tax; reduced > war spending; removing subsidies for pharma companies; removing the > hedge-fund/private equity tax loophole; tax hikes for the wealthy; tax > cuts for the poor; some health-care spending etc. Unlike the financial > bailout which sounds entirely awful and the stimulus package which is > only so-so. > > Sure the budget makes exaggerated noises about deficit reduction, but > it is coming from soaking the rich and auctioning carbon credits - > which in principle would leave a lot of fiscal ammunition in reserve > for progressive policies in future. > -raghu. > > -- > "I have the heart of a child... in a jar on my desk." - Stephen King > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
