B-S included a cap on taxes of 21 percent. Doing what JD suggests, which I've endorsed in the past, would break the cap. As with other aspects of their proposal, B-S grossly exceeded their mandate by pontificating on tax policy.
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: > on how to get short-term stimulus and a longer-term movement toward > budget balance: > > 1) making the federal income tax _more_ progressive (combined with > short-term deficits to stimulate demand) would help with long-term > budget balance, because the more GDP grows, the more people would be > in the top tax brackets. > > 2) getting rid of the indexing of tax brackets would also help, > because higher inflation rates (which usually goes along with more > real GDP growth) would push more people into to the top tax brackets. > > -- these are very orthodox proposals. Why didn't the BS > (Bowles-Simpson) commission talk about them? [rhetorical question > alert!] > > -- > Jim Devine / "The conventional view serves to protect us from the > painful job of thinking." - John Kenneth Galbraith > _______________________________________________ > 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
