That's 21 percent of GDP. On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Max Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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
