Put Entitlements, Defense, And Taxes On The Table
In President Obama's recent State Of The Union Address, he talked about winning the future by out-educating, out-innovating, and out-building the rest of the world. He also talked about taking responsibility for the nation's deficit and long-term debt because we can't win the future if we pass on a mountain of debt to tomorrow's American generations.
The President's proposed budget for 2012 follows up on The State Of The Union Address by eliminating wasteful spending, cutting programs that aren't working, making tough choices, and targeting necessary and responsible investments in our future. The budget invests in innovation for jobs and industries of the future. It invests in roads, bridges, rail, and high-speed internet to help American business ship and connect to the world. And, the budget invests in education so America's students are prepared for the 21st Century. (See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget.)
Erskine Bowles (D) and Alan Simpson (R) co-chairs of The National (bipartisan) Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform write in "The Hill" that President Obama's budget "takes some important steps toward putting this country on a more sustainable path."
President Obama's proposed 2012 budget tightens the belt on discretionary spending which represents a mere 12% of the overall budget. In reality, cuts to discretionary spending are irrelevant to truly solving the nation's structural long-term debt.
Erskine Bowles, Alan Simpson, and President Obama are in accord. They understand that making cuts to the discretionary portion of the budget, though important and stabilizing, alone will not eliminate the long-term debt. There is only one way to get that job done. Put on the table medicare, medicade, social security, defense spending, and tax reform. The Bowles-Simpson Commission Report addresses these 5 big debt drivers and most importantly recommends ways to stabilize and safeguard medicare, medicade, and social security for the future.
(See http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/.)
To eliminate the long-term debt will require our nation's legislators to be courageous, do what's right, cease the campaigning, make some tough political choices, and share in the sacrifice. Hopefully President Obama will find enough adults in the room to help him get the job done.
Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is also neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (GOFACT.) He lives in Glendale.
Richard O. Schwab
830 Congress Ave.
Glendale, Ohio 45246
H.513-771-4397
Monday, February 28, 2011
Friday, February 25, 2011
Oh Oh -- Read This Important Piece
It's Baghdad, not Madison, Paul Krugman says:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/opinion/25krugman.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/25/opinion/25krugman.html?src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
Thursday, February 24, 2011
Stan Chesley
(c) 2011 F. Bruce Abel
There are two huge stories in my lifetime eminating from Cincinnati impacting my interests and crossing my practice: the law and business. One of them is Stan Chesley and what he accomplished/accomplishes. Being a trial lawyer I am jealous. For large cases there just wasn't anybody else on the plaintiff's side and the world knew it.
But give the man his due! I was discussing the case yesterday with a co-counsel and he said: "I saw him argue in federal court in favor of class action status and without any written legal authority all he did was say, 'Well in Utah I caused the court to do this and in New Jersey [I caused the court] did that.'"
And I said, "Yeah that's the point. When he spoke the judge knew that he was the master of this field and that he could rely on what Stan said."
The man just took the air out of the room for the rest of the plaintiffs' trial bar. So be it. I wish I were he.
And his wife is the best federal judge around.
The other story: Carl Lindner.
There are two huge stories in my lifetime eminating from Cincinnati impacting my interests and crossing my practice: the law and business. One of them is Stan Chesley and what he accomplished/accomplishes. Being a trial lawyer I am jealous. For large cases there just wasn't anybody else on the plaintiff's side and the world knew it.
But give the man his due! I was discussing the case yesterday with a co-counsel and he said: "I saw him argue in federal court in favor of class action status and without any written legal authority all he did was say, 'Well in Utah I caused the court to do this and in New Jersey [I caused the court] did that.'"
And I said, "Yeah that's the point. When he spoke the judge knew that he was the master of this field and that he could rely on what Stan said."
The man just took the air out of the room for the rest of the plaintiffs' trial bar. So be it. I wish I were he.
And his wife is the best federal judge around.
The other story: Carl Lindner.
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Very Important
The Baseline Scenario
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1.30 > $1.00
Posted: 11 Feb 2011 11:41 AM PST
By James Kwak
Bruce Bartlett (hat tip Catherine Rampell) reproduces a table from a paper by Suzanne Mettler showing that most people don’t realize that they are beneficiaries of government social programs. For example, 60 percent of people who take the mortgage interest deduction say they “have not used a government social program.” Now, while the mortgage interest deduction is a subsidy designed to enable people buy houses, you could get into an argument about whether it’s really a “social program.” But these are the analogous figures for some more classic welfare programs:
Social Security retirement and survivors’ benefits: 44%
Unemployment insurance: 43%
Medicare: 40%
Social Security Disability Insurance: 29%
Medicaid: 28%
Food stamps: 25%
Obvious it’s easy for people to support lower taxes and lower government spending when they don’t realize they are beneficiaries of that spending. (And the numbers on a per-program basis would certainly be higher. For example, it’s likely that of people who take the mortgage interest deduction, many more than 60 percent don’t think that it’s a government social program; the number is only 60 percent because some of those people realize that other things they receive, like Medicare, are government social programs.)
But there’s another number in Bartlett’s post that I think is more interesting. That’s an estimate by the Tax Foundation that, in 2004, the average middle-quintile household received $16,781 in benefits from the federal government. That same study says that, on average, middle-quintile households get back $1.30 in transfer payments and other government spending for every $1 that they pay in taxes. I didn’t review the study in detail, but this is just common sense, anyway. When you have a progressive tax system and an income distribution with a much longer tail at the high end, you would expect people in the middle to be net beneficiaries of government.
I don’t really think that the point of democracy is for people to simply vote their self-interest. That could lead to all sorts of things, like the tyranny of the majority that Tocqueville warned about. But right now, it would be a distinct improvement if people would vote their self-interest.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1.30 > $1.00
Posted: 11 Feb 2011 11:41 AM PST
By James Kwak
Bruce Bartlett (hat tip Catherine Rampell) reproduces a table from a paper by Suzanne Mettler showing that most people don’t realize that they are beneficiaries of government social programs. For example, 60 percent of people who take the mortgage interest deduction say they “have not used a government social program.” Now, while the mortgage interest deduction is a subsidy designed to enable people buy houses, you could get into an argument about whether it’s really a “social program.” But these are the analogous figures for some more classic welfare programs:
Social Security retirement and survivors’ benefits: 44%
Unemployment insurance: 43%
Medicare: 40%
Social Security Disability Insurance: 29%
Medicaid: 28%
Food stamps: 25%
Obvious it’s easy for people to support lower taxes and lower government spending when they don’t realize they are beneficiaries of that spending. (And the numbers on a per-program basis would certainly be higher. For example, it’s likely that of people who take the mortgage interest deduction, many more than 60 percent don’t think that it’s a government social program; the number is only 60 percent because some of those people realize that other things they receive, like Medicare, are government social programs.)
But there’s another number in Bartlett’s post that I think is more interesting. That’s an estimate by the Tax Foundation that, in 2004, the average middle-quintile household received $16,781 in benefits from the federal government. That same study says that, on average, middle-quintile households get back $1.30 in transfer payments and other government spending for every $1 that they pay in taxes. I didn’t review the study in detail, but this is just common sense, anyway. When you have a progressive tax system and an income distribution with a much longer tail at the high end, you would expect people in the middle to be net beneficiaries of government.
I don’t really think that the point of democracy is for people to simply vote their self-interest. That could lead to all sorts of things, like the tyranny of the majority that Tocqueville warned about. But right now, it would be a distinct improvement if people would vote their self-interest.
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
Duke Energy Bills
Today my Duke Energy Bill came. I am conducting a study of the various bills that people receive, in light of deregulation and aggregation. I would like as many readers as possible to send me a copy of your Duke Energy bill arriving in the month of February. You can redact name and account number if you want. Also, tell me weather your municipality is under an aggregation plan or not.
Today's bill for me is very important because it is the first full month under Glendale's aggregation plan for natural gas (I chose to opt out).
You can email your bill to me at babel2@fuse.net, or fax it at 513-772-7991, or mail it to
F. Bruce Abel, 970 Laurel Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45246.
On the right margin you can click on my current Duke Energy bill, page one. To see the whole three-page bill, go to http://www.natgagu.blogspot.com/.
Today's bill for me is very important because it is the first full month under Glendale's aggregation plan for natural gas (I chose to opt out).
You can email your bill to me at babel2@fuse.net, or fax it at 513-772-7991, or mail it to
F. Bruce Abel, 970 Laurel Avenue, Cincinnati, OH 45246.
On the right margin you can click on my current Duke Energy bill, page one. To see the whole three-page bill, go to http://www.natgagu.blogspot.com/.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
From Richard O. Schwab -- Worth Reading
"Trashing The Congressional Budget Office"
The Congressional Budget Office calculates the official cost of legislation for Congress. The CBO is the one objective, impartial, and non partisan voice in American politics. As a result, for 35 years both parties have accepted the judgments of the CBO, accepting short- term losses for better and more fiscally responsible legislation.
The CBO initially scored the Democrat's first attempts at health reform as fiscally unsound. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 was the result of Democrats going back to the drawing board and eventually receiving the CBO's seal of approval. The CBO estimated the legislation would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first decade and $1.2 trillion in the second decade. (See http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act?wasRedirected=true.)
The CBO has ruled that H.R. 2 "Repealing The Job-Killing Health Care Law," introduced in the House January 5, 2011, would increase the deficit by $230 billion. (See http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?cat=5.)
The facts don't support the case the Republicans want to make, so they're turning their backs on the agency supplying the facts. They're
calling the CBO's scores "garbage."
Trashing the truly respected and truly neutral Congressional Budget Office may cause long term damage. What will be harmed if obtaining a positive score from the CBO no longer matters? The truth and the deficit for sure.
Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is also a neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (GOFACT.) He lives in Glendale.
Richard O. Schwab
830 Congress Ave.
Glendale, Ohio 45246
H.513-771-4397
M.513-470-4599
The Congressional Budget Office calculates the official cost of legislation for Congress. The CBO is the one objective, impartial, and non partisan voice in American politics. As a result, for 35 years both parties have accepted the judgments of the CBO, accepting short- term losses for better and more fiscally responsible legislation.
The CBO initially scored the Democrat's first attempts at health reform as fiscally unsound. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 was the result of Democrats going back to the drawing board and eventually receiving the CBO's seal of approval. The CBO estimated the legislation would reduce the deficit by $143 billion over the first decade and $1.2 trillion in the second decade. (See http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act?wasRedirected=true.)
The CBO has ruled that H.R. 2 "Repealing The Job-Killing Health Care Law," introduced in the House January 5, 2011, would increase the deficit by $230 billion. (See http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?cat=5.)
The facts don't support the case the Republicans want to make, so they're turning their backs on the agency supplying the facts. They're
calling the CBO's scores "garbage."
Trashing the truly respected and truly neutral Congressional Budget Office may cause long term damage. What will be harmed if obtaining a positive score from the CBO no longer matters? The truth and the deficit for sure.
Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is also a neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (GOFACT.) He lives in Glendale.
Richard O. Schwab
830 Congress Ave.
Glendale, Ohio 45246
H.513-771-4397
M.513-470-4599
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)