We'll know more about the electoral impact as time progresses, but yesterday's independent analysis of Mitt Romney's tax plan changed the nature of the debate. Researchers at the Brookings Institution and the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center delivered the equivalent of an electoral bombshell: the Republican's proposal cuts taxes on the rich and pays for it by raising taxes on the middle class.
It took less than a day for President Obama's campaign team to turn the revelations into an ad.
The tagline is brutal: "Mitt Romney's middle class tax increase: He pays less, you pay more." According to a campaign source, the spot will air in New Hampshire, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada.
Not surprisingly, the Romney campaign is not pleased, and spent much of yesterday afternoon attacking the report. Romney spokesman Ryan Williams said Americans should question the results because the Tax Policy Center scholars who conducted the research are "liberal."
There are a few problems with this. First, this isn't an argument. Second, the Romney campaign has previously said the Tax Policy Center is "objective" and "non-partisan." And third, one of the co-authors of the report is a Bush administration veteran.
When the "liberal" talking point failed miserably, the Romney campaign tried a new tack: the Brookings/TPC analysis is flawed because the economists failed to account for "dynamic" scoring. As the argument goes, the Romney plan will produce such extraordinary results, the economy will boom, and the numbers will add up if you account for the magical awesomeness.
But here's the thing: the researchers "bent over backwards to literally give Romney every possible benefit of the doubt" and worked under the dubious assumption that more Republican tax cuts will stimulate the economy. Brookings/TPC ran the numbers while playing by Republican rules and the results were still a disaster.
There's a larger arc to this story, and it's critically important.
When it comes to taxes, Romney is effectively making two points. The first is that he can offer a 20% across-the-board income tax rate cut, while also eliminating the estate tax on millionaires and billionaires, slashing corporate tax rates, and approving a capital-gains tax cut, too.
The second part of the argument sets the parameters of his promise: he can do all of this without raising the deficit or destroying basic American institutions, simply by eliminating various tax deductions and tax expenditures.
Which ones? We don't know; Romney refuses to say. We're just supposed to take his word for it, comfortable with the knowledge that the plan will work.
But yesterday, the charade fell apart. Tax-policy experts whom Romney himself has described as "objective" and "non-partisan" ran the numbers exactly as the Republican candidate asked, using the parameters the Republican candidate created for himself.
And the results confirmed what has long been assumed: either Romney will grow the deficit dramatically or he'll have to raise taxes on 95% of the population in order to give new tax breaks to the rich.
There's no way around this; the arithmetic is stubborn.
Romney's numbers simply don't add up. Period. Full Stop.
Leave a Comment:
You forget the third possibility- and ,(judging by past activity), the one most favored by Republicans:
DEFICITS DON'T MATTER!
Wrong Day...
Deficits don't matter, except when there is a democrat in the White House!
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." — President Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002
Oh but half of America can indeed be fooled again.
Half of America are fools always.
and again, and again and again . . .
and again and again and again... The one thing our public schools are almost all deficient in is teaching critical thinking.( and apparently addition, subtraction and percentages.)
Margie - that's part of the GOP plan, too...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/06/27/1101959/-Texas-GOP-Platform-to-ban-teaching-Critical-Thinking-Skills-in-schools-The-stupid-IT-BURNS
If a true-believing supply-sider ever accosts you with the wonders of dynamic scoring, you can bludgeon them with the facts:
- http://www.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/mankiw/files/dynamicscoring_05-1212.pdf (From Greg Mankiw who is on Romney's economic team and knows Team Romney is lying about the effects of dynamic scoring and is effect like bragging about having a bad day at the races.)
- A Short Guide to Dynamic Scoring
- Dynamic Scoring: Not so Fast!
Some actual dynamic scoring analyses showing the minimal positive effects:
- CBO: Analyzing the Economic and Budgetary Effects of a 10 Percent Cut in Income Tax Rates (Conducted by Douglas Holkes-Eakin, McCain's economic advisor, and currently carrying water for Republicans.)
- A Dynamic Analysis of Permanent Extension of the Presiden't Tax Relief
- Econbrowser: A Dynamic Analysis of Permanent Extension of the President's Tax Relief
There's a lot more if anyone's interested.
Yet in spite of all the empirical evidence that supply side economics was accurately called voo-doo economics by George H. W. Bush, those on the right continue to rely on it for setting economic policy. When do we get to a point where it is not enough to just believe in something for it to be a valid counterargument, but that actual empirical evidence is required before something can be used as an alternative?
For wingnuts and the true believers, economic theory is not enough, 30 years of empirical data rebuking it is not enough, NOTHING is enough. These morons still believe tax cuts on the supply side and "job creators" will, after all these 30+ years, finally turn this country and world into the capitalist Utopia it is supposed to be.
Republicans and the Useful Mitt-iots are simply fact-based, ideological political religious zealots, no different from any other religious zealotry.
And they are no different on climate science, climate change, and global warming.
For the good of the entire world, the wingnuts must be extinguished.
Um you realize the first paper you reference concludes that there is truth to the affect of dynamic scoring. "In all of the models considered here, the dynamic response of the economy to tax changes is too large to be ignored. In almost all cases, tax cuts are partly self-financing. This is especially true for cuts in capital income taxes." Which I would not finding surprising coming from a Republican economist.
Yep - but from what I read, while according to their various models and various assuptions regarding the values of parameters in those models a change in capital gains taxes is about 50 - 75% paid for by growth, a change in taxes on labor is only about 15 - 19% paid for by growth. That is a far cry from what I understand is being argued by those who champion 'supply-side' (or perhaps 'Romney', if you will) economics - that 100% of all tax reductions is paid for by growth.
I do. And it admits to extremely little when the models reflect anything toward reality. Like I said, it's like bragging about having a bad day at the races. And let's not forget, this is a OPTIMISTIC study, and why I listed it. When you get to those that aren't as optimistic, and more reality-based, it looks much worse. There are even refutations of Mankiw's study that calls him out for his un-realistic assumptions and models. Again, that was the BEST they could come up with.
Understand?
PS: And it's not in the dynamic scoring that is supposed to be the great consequence of supply-side economics, it's supposed to be the dynamic effects on the economy of supply-side economics (making it easier on the supply-side). The empirical facts speak for themselves: supply-side economics is a joke. Even the optimistic theoretical considerations don't even conclude what the conservatives/Republicans advertise for their savior brand of economics.
Supply-side economics is a failure empirically and theoretically non-robust.
Edit: OUCH! I messed in #3.2 above. It should be:
Republicans and the Useful Mitt-iots are simply FAITH-based, ideological political religious zealots, no different from any other religious zealotry.
I guess I should add a few links to make the Mankiw paper above a little more understandable. Aatencio referred to a blurb in the abstract. Actually, the abstract is misleading. (I knoowwww -- who would have thought a conservative economist would do that!) Try these links -- they're much easier to read than the Mankiw paper -- to get a better idea of just how little supply-siders had and have to get excited about when it comes to Mankiw's theoretical dynamic scoring study:
- Sebastian Mallaby - The Return Of Voodoo Economics
- Brad DeLong: Greg Mankiw's Abstract Is Misleading...
- Eric M. Leeper and Shu-Chun Susan Yang
- April 2006 | Angry Bear - Financial and Economic Commentary
If you read those, you'll understand that Mankiw only gets positive results -- but nowhere even close to tax cuts paying for themselves -- if the tax cuts are paid for: 1/2 in the short run and 1/2 paid in the long run. That is NOT what any of the Republican tax cuts have been in the past, and NOT what has been proposed for the future. Republican tax cuts are NOT paid for. Since that is the case, Republicans can NOT even appeal to Mankiw's results for solace and succor when it comes to their tax cuts. At all!
The upshot of all this is simple: Republicans are trying to starve the government in order to try to convince people to get rid of Social Security and Medicare. It is a fraud they are playing on the American people. And half of the people are stupid enough to be fooled by it.
Aatencio referred to a blurb in the abstract.
Nah - Aatencio refers to the second paragraph of the Conclusion section - not the Abstract.
Thanks for the links - interesting all.
I haven't read the Mankiw paper in over a year so... Anyway, the deal that's pertinent to the current shenanigans is that Mankiw -- a member of Romney's economics team and was a key member of the Bush Administration economics team -- knows for certain Romney is lying about the Romney plan. Almost certainly Romney knows he is lying about his plan if the economics team has told him anything. These people are trying to pass off yet another fraud on the country. And they KNOW it.
There have actually been other studies of the Ryan and Romney plans and they show essentially the same thing. The thing about the current study is it actually bent over backwards to give Romney the benefit of the doubt. The assumptions couldn't have been more favorable. And it's still a disaster. Romney can NOT argue his way out of it.
His only hope is an incompetent press. And an incompetent press is precisely why he hasn't been laughed out the country by now. So he might get away with it. I still find it difficult to believe that a fraud of this magnitude can be perpetrated upon us. But it certainly can. And that is truly scary.
The man is afraid to tell the public about his personal taxes but he wants the people to make him President, in charge of their taxes. The Republicans should be ashamed that this will be their candidate but they only worry about defeating the black man and attacking women's health care. Who elected these cro=magnon people ?? Republican women should be ashamed. The public should be demanding more honesty for Romney and his party. Mitch McConnell was not elected to stop the Senate from working. Bachman is reliving the McCarthy era. Someone has to call them out as bigots and liars.
I like Romney. He's a funny guy. Makes me laugh, but we just can't afford him. Obama for President, Romney for Court Jester.
It is loads of fun watching Romney twist himself like a pretzel.
I hate calling anyone a "liar", especially people I don't know well. To me "liar" is such a strong condemnation. But Mitt Romney is a liar. And he's not someone who tells little white lies, he's a BALD-FACED LIAR. Rachel's interview with James Roosevelt was the last straw for me. Romney's lies are unrelenting. Does he actually think he can do this as president?!? This man doesn't belong anywhere near the Oval Office.
all anyone has to do is just watch his body language. that frozen smile on his face. its all faux. it like fake fur or leatherette, imitation cheese, taste like bacon, but its actually spam. romney dose not know how to be real and it shows.
LOL, that smile really is frozen, isn't it? It's more like a smirk.
Didn't WE do this already? Actually it's been trickle down for the last 30+ years. Ok, so I'm not a mathematician, but you cannot keep taking out money, while drastically increasing spending on Defense, and NOT GROW THE DEFICIT!
Maybe it's just me, but you cannot keep subtracting and still get the math correct! And if that's the case, then I need to GOTP math teacher to grade my next math class exam!
"Stupid is as stupid does" Forrest Gump - how long must we endure the stupid among US?!
Sure you can - it's like my checking account; the more checks I write, the bigger my balance is - Right? !! LOL
Bain Capital Lobbied to keep capital gains taxes for Romney at %15, sure, Romney had "left" by then. But he supported them at the time... here, Jon Stewart said it funnier: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-24-2012/indecision-2012---i-know-what-you-did-last-quarter
Romney is in this race for one reason and one reason only -- to change the tax code to make himself even richer. Once he's done that he'll likely vanish for 3 1/2 years.
No, he's in it to add the job title to his pile of possessions. The money is just something he feels naturally entitled to.
Mitt Romney is in this race for one reason and one reason only: to get the tax codes changed so he can get even richer. I wouldn't be surprised if he resigned after accomplishing that since he doesn't give a crap about anything else.
Why is this race even close?
It's close -- today -- because a lot of knee-jerk Republicans haven't started paying attention yet. Romney has nowhere to go but down. People aren't going to suddenly decide that they like him.
It's close because the Debates haven't started yet. Once you get Romney and his half truths and flat out lies and non answers. In a national debate with the President. Romney has no where to go but down. Romney will be able to get away with just using GOP Talking Points on the Fux News Debate. But the others not so much. And once he bombs those. His numbers will plummet faster than a walk street broker during the great depression.
It is close because the economy sucks, period. Most voters aren't engaged in the process enough to see that the GOP has sat on their hands for the last 4 years hoping that the economy stays so bad that they can win this year. A majority of people don't understand that the POTUS doesn't write the policy. Furthermore, we are just a politically and ideologically divided nation at our base.
Oh, how I wish these guys would realize the rich don't actually stimulate the economy because they don't NEED to. Middle-classers and working poor NEED things far more often (even if it's just food), and spend money faster. We don't have the luxury to save thousands of dollars monthly (or weekly). Furthermore- it's the whole 99% vs 1%- 99% of the population stimulating the economy by DEMAND (i.e.- buying stuff), goes farther than 1% of the population attempting the same thing. The time for supply-side, trickle-down elitism is over.
Romney's Tax Plan...Great for the 1%...Bad for the 99%!!! The Platzner Post Facebook, and Twitter https://www.facebook.com/ThePlatznerPost
If I do not use the phrase "magical awesomeness" in the future to describe what the republicans think happens with trickle down, then I will have failed you, Steve! Love it!
I'd like to see what the Tax Policy Center outcomes for "most likely/current parameters" in addition to their giving Robme the benefit of the "doubt/dynamic scoring".
"Tax breaks" for the rich are then taxes WE pay the rich... Profit is the tax the rich charge us for buying stuff.
As you listen to the rhetoric on T.V.and on facebook you have to stop and wonder! How many hands are up Romney's ass and controling him? And how many republicans just want Obama out of office, no matter who is in there. Because we all know they are pushing the race card, in oh so subtle forms. I am just waiting for them to say it isn't called the "White House" for nothing. Long gone are the days when we remember how we got here, and whose back we stepped on to get where we are at. They care about one thing, how do "I" get richer. They could careless about a woman getting raped, as long as she doesn't get abortion. How about publically chopping off the man's penis? I am tired off paying their stay in jail. Because I would rather be fair, so far the republicans only mention you would prefer the woman to serve the rape crime for the rest of their lifes. It is not like we can't prove he did it. And as far the 1 percent who wish to control us, let us learn from history. When the white man landed on the soil, he took over and put the indians on reservations. This time stand up and fight for what is ours. Tell republicans to go watch Russia from Sarah Palins back yard as they try to figure other bazar plots in the newly built mental wars that we build for them.
Have we heard this before? Cut taxes, increase defense spending and balance the budget? This is truthy "magical awesomeness" indeed, for Ronaldus Magnus proclaimed it so.
Wow!!!! Even Jethro of the Beverly Hill Billys can do better ciphering than Mittens. I think Mr Romney needs to retake that basic math course. You know where they teach you that a 14 trillion dollar deficit minus less tax revenue = 14 trillion dollars plus X trillions dollars. That means you are going further into debt Mr. Romney. Basic concept most people know by the time they are 8 years old. Yep it is that old double negative number again. Mitts tax plan = IMAGINARY NUMBERS.
The Republicans must think all Americans are either really nieve or really stupid! Maybe it's both.
I want a t-shirt that says Mitt the Twitt strikes again!
This information needs to get to all who think Romney knows what he is talking about. However so many people do no read articles like this - on the internet, in the newspaper, in magazines - and this means old and young.
Romney doesn't answer questions - he only gives points that he thinks are correct - BUT can't back any of the up. And he made a mess of his trip to Europe and Isreal and I want someone representing us who keeps his mouth shut, thinks and then talks. But there are probably a few of his people who fed him the words - so then is he able to think on his own??
Y'all are misunderstanding the criticism: it's not that the TPC has a liberal bias; it's that they're using arithmetic and as everyone knows, arithmetic has a liberal bias.
The larger issue with Romney is that he is in so many ways a stealth candidate. He takes almost no questions from mainstream media, and the few he answers contain no details. We don't know his plans. His policies are intentionally vague. He won't talk about his religion, except to say that he gives a lot of money to his church--and that may be true but it may also be false. He won't talk about his taxes or his income. He pleads privacy on all personal questions. And yet we know from the scant records that exist that he is always about making money and that he cannot be trusted. All that aside, he stands a very real chance of getting elected, thanks to voter suppression and enormous funds available to buy attack ads based on lies. If he wins, it's really the end of America's long-standing tradition of at least having some idea who we elect to high office.
Please stop calling them "jo creators" and start calling them "job profiteers" because they do not create any job that they aren't going to profit from...and as you know that all depends on demand.
In reading all of the above comments I am reassured there are still people out there who actually thinks rationally about what is going on today and have strong opinions. I went on Google the other day and searched "Why are Republican Voters so stupid" I was amazed at what came back, great reading, increased my understanding of the Republican mind or lack of it. There seems to be a correlation between being a Republican and being very religious, both require blind faith without question in order to work.