A popular plan no one wants

  • Article by: EZRA KLEIN , Washington Post
  • Updated: December 9, 2012 - 5:51 PM

Fewer would praise Simpson-Bowles if they knew what's in it.

  • 26
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
pumiceDec. 9, 12 5:29 PM

From the article: "There are a lot of tax increases in Simpson-Bowles: $2.6 trillion over 10 years, to be exact. That's more than President Obama ever proposed." And yet, Ezra Klein is absolutely correct in his observation that--had President Obama praised Simpson-Bowles--the loyal opposition would have greeted his support with cries of "More proof that he's another tax-and-spend, property-stealing socialist!"

30
10
my4centsDec. 9, 12 6:58 PM

With or without Simpson-Bowles it's easy to see that "he's another tax-and-spend, property-stealing socialist!" Problem is, many people still believe that he will only tax "the other guy." Because he's been able to pull this off he secured the votes of those who don't mind using government to steal from their neighbors.

Rightfully so, very few legislators supported Simpson-Bowles. However, there should have been far more taken from it and discussed by legislators and the media. Instead, because Obama ignored it so did the media that does his bidding.

11
42
twincitizen1Dec. 9, 12 7:17 PM

There are absolutely no good arguments against raising the gas tax. It must be raised, and indexed to future inflation. Currently, the tax effectively gets lower every year as inflation goes up, meanwhile construction and maintenance costs will continue to increase. If you are against raising the gas tax, then you are for increased deficits.

39
9
allotropeDec. 9, 12 7:33 PM

To be fair, nobody wants to do what's necessary to balance the budget.

41
7
hawkeye56379Dec. 9, 12 7:34 PM

twincitizen1: I agree about the gas tax. Look at what happened when Clinton raised gas tax by 4.3 cents per gallon as part of his deficit-reduction plan in 1993. It played a big part in balancing the budget and did so without harming the economic boom of those years.

28
4
cstoney48Dec. 9, 12 7:41 PM

my4cents said: " because Obama ignored it.." He wasn't the only one. The GOP House members refused to sign on to the recommendations. What does that say about their commitment to fiscal responsibility? Policy guru Ryan was among the dissenters. Real leader there! As for the media, if Obama says anything, Fox is opposed. Count on Fox for deep analysis--NOT!

33
4
erikj3Dec. 9, 12 7:55 PM

Now is not the time to worry about deficit reduction. Now is the time to INVEST in our nation's future by upgrading all of our infrastructure (especially the energy grid) to a 21st century standard. We can do it, if we raise taxes on the rich and make them and corporations pay their fair share, and use the money to put people to work.

27
11
mklundDec. 9, 12 8:07 PM

Comments on "Meet the Press" and other media make it clear: the spending cuts the GOP wants are on entitlements. Not military, not war on terror, not agricultural subsidies. This is unconscionable! Our deficit by 2008 did not spring from entitlements, but from tax cuts set to expire in 2010 but still in place, a gigantic boost in spending for Homeland Security, and two protracted wars. Post the financial collapse of 2008 our deficit exploded to save our economy. Voters know these were GOP-endorsed spending. Shifting blame to people's programs is a farce. Long-term debt may require tinkering - but short-term deficit is all on the GOP's books.

37
7
probsolverDec. 9, 12 8:34 PM

Now is not the time to worry about deficit reduction ---- interesting respective coming from someone who indicated he is not working and going to school. So really, you won't be hurt by whst you recommend. How convenient for you

6
28
erikj3Dec. 9, 12 9:07 PM

probsolver: "Now is not the time to worry about deficit reduction ---- interesting respective coming from someone who indicated he is not working and going to school. So really, you won't be hurt by whst you recommend. How convenient for you."...You left out the part where I said I want to work. And, I would be hurt (eventually) if Medicare were turned into a voucher program and/or Social Security were privatized.

21
5

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT