DIFFERENT DEDUCTIONS AND CLOSING LOOPHOLES.
>> REALISTICALLY, ONE PAGE, AN OUTLINE, WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR
THIS TAX CUT? >> IT'S NOT GOING TO GET PAID
FOR. PART OF WHY YOU GOT WHAT YOU GOT
YESTERDAY -- I'VE SEEN A LOT OF TAX PROPOSALS OVER THE YEARS,
USUALLY THEY HAVE MORE THAN ONE PAGE AND A FEW MORE THAN SEVEN
NUMBERS. WHY YOU GOT WHAT YOU GOT
YESTERDAY IS PROBABLY THIS 100-DAY THING.
SECONDLY IT DOESN'T PAY FOR ITSELF.
THE TREASURY SECRETARY ALMOST ADMITTED -- HE'S SAYING, WELL,
MAYBE WE GET TO 3% GROWTH, BUT YOU NEED 4.5% GROWTH TO PAY FOR
THIS THING. THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
THERE IS NO PAID FOR. IT'S BASICALLY A $5.5 TRILLION
UNPAID FOR TAX CUT, RELYING ON THE OLD REAGAN DOCTRINE OF
SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMICS WHICH HAS BEEN DISCREDITED.
>> MICHAEL STEELE WE HAVE DEMOCRATS SHAKING THEIR HEADS
TODAY, BUT IS HIS LARGER PROBLEM PROBABLY A GROUP OF REPUBLICANS
WHO ARE FRIGHTENED TO DEATH OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE
NATIONAL DEBT? >> MICHAEL, MICHAEL, MICHAEL,
THAT DEBT THING. THAT LITTLE PESKY DEBT THING.
WHAT DEBT? WE DON'T HAVE A DEBT.
I CAN'T BELIEVE WHAT I'M HEARING COMING OUT OF REPUBLICAN
CORNERS, WHEN THEY TALK ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SPENDING THE
ADMINISTRATION HAS IN ITS HEAD. WE'VE GONE FROM A TRILLION IN
INFRASTRUCTURE TO ALMOST $2 TRILLION IN THE PRESIDENT'S OWN
WORDS. YOU HAVE THE HEALTH CARE PIECE,
A LOT OF THE MANDATES IN OBAMACARE WILL STAY THERE, IN
THE NEW HEALTH CARE BILL THERE'S A TAX CUT TO THAT.
THE REALITY O OF 1986 -- BIGGES TAX CUT SINCE 1986.
GREAT, BUT REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED?
WE CONTINUED TO SPEND ABOVE THE LEVEL OF REVENUE.
THE IDEA THAT YOU MAKE THESE TAX CUTS AND THEN THE NEXT DAY
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE GROWTH IS JUST LUDICROUS.
IT DOESN'T WORK LIKE THAT. THE ECONOMY DOESN'T TURN ON A
DIME LIKE THAT. IT'S GOING TO TAKE TIME FOR
THOSE TAX CUTS TO SETTLE IN TO THE BUSINESS AND THE PERSONAL
INCOME REALITIES OF PEOPLE AND THEN HAVE THAT TRANSLATE WHILE
AT THE SAME TIME YOU'RE CONTINUING TO INCREASE SPENDING.
YES, MICHAEL, IT'S GOING TO HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON THE DEBT AND
THE DEFICIT AND REPUBLICANS ARE GOING TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR
THAT, THE SAME FISCAL CONSERVATIVES WE HELPED ELECT IN
2010 TO STOP THE SPENDING BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE NOW A
PARTY TO IT. >> MARK HALPERIN, THE WHITE
HOUSE SAYS YES, SURE, THIS IS A BRIEF DOCUMENT.
IT'S THE FRAMEWORK, THE BEGINNING OF A CONVERSATION, NOT
A FINAL PLAN. PAUL RYAN CAME OUT YESTERDAY AND
SAID, YES, THIS IS ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT HOUSE REPUBLICANS
ARE THINKING IN TERMS OF TAX REFORM AND THIS MIGHT BE OUR ONE
BIG CHANCE THIS GENERATION TO GET IT DONE.
>> ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT THE PRESIDENT PROPOSED IN THE
CAMPAIGN AND WHAT RYAN AND THE HOUSE REPUBLICANS PROPOSED,
LOWER RATES, CORPORATE AND INDIVIDUAL AND BROADEN THE BASE,
THERE'S GOING TO BE A FIGHT, AS CONGRESS GOES FORWARD HERE ABOUT
WHAT THEY DO WITH DEDUCTIONS. I THINK THEY WOULD BE
POLITICALLY SMART AND PROBABLY SUB STANLEY SMART TO LET IT SKEW
LESS TOWARDS THE RICH AND MORE TOWARDS THE WORKING CLASS.
THERE'S LOTS OF WAYS TO REDUCE THE DEFICIT.
CUTTING SPENDING IS ONE OF THEM. BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE FASTER
GROWTH. REPUBLICANS BELIEVE THATT FASTE
GROWTH COMES WITH LOWER RATES, BROADENING THE BASE.
THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" LOVES WHAT THEY PUT OUT YESTERDAY.
THEY MAY BE WRONG. I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY DOUBT
THAT AT 2% GROWTH WE'RE NEVER GOING TO REDUCE THE DEBT.
IT'S A LITTLE COUNTERINTUITIVE. NOT PURE SUPPLY SIDE.
IT'S A FACT. YOU NEED FASTER GROWTH RATE.
EVEN SOME DEMOCRATS WOULD SAY LOWER CORPORATE TAX RATES, LOWER
INDIVIDUAL RATES COULD LEAD TO MORE ECONOMIC GROWTH.
IT'S THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IN THE COUNTRY TODAY.
2% GROWTH. SOME PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT'S ALL
WE CAN DO. IF THAT'S ALL WE CAN DO, WE'LL
NEVER GET RID OF THE DEFICIT AND THE DEBT.
>> REPUBLICANS CONSISTENTLY BELIEVE YOU CUT TAXES AND
PRODUCE MORE GROWTH. WHAT'S THE HISTORY ON THIS AND
WHAT'S THE GLOBAL EVIDENCE OF THIS?
>> THE HISTORY IS IT DOES PRODUCE MORE GROWTH.
IF YOU PUMP MORE MONEY, PEOPLE WILL SPEND IT.
>> WILL WE GET FROM 2 TO 3%? >> NO.
WHAT MAKES THE ECONOMY GROW IS ONE, MORE PEOPLE WORKING AND,
TWO, PEOPLE WORKING AND PRODUCING MORE STUFF.
SOME OF THIS WILL HELP IN THAT DWREKS.
A LOT OF THEM HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT.
WE HAVE A LABOR FORCE THAT'S AGING, PRODUCTIVITY THAT'S BEEN
SLOW FOR A WHOLE VARIETY OF REASONS.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME, THINGS THAT
WERE NEVER MENTIONED YESTERDAY WAS INFRASTRUCTUREMENT
INTRASTRICTURE IS ONE THING THAT WOULD MAKE THE ECONOMY GROW
FASTER. YET IT HAS DISAPPEARED FROM THE
PRESIDENT'S LEXICON. I WOULD JUST SAY ONE OTHER THING
ABOUT PAUL RYAN. PAUL RYAN'S PLAN IS SOMEWHAT
SIMILAR. REMEMBER HE HAD THAT BORDER
ADJUSTMENT TAX WHICH WOULD HAVE RAISED A TRILLION DOLLARS.
THIS GOES BACK TO WHAT MICHAEL STEELE WAS SAYING, IT'S NOT
OBVIOUS THAT THE REPUBLICANS ON THE HILL, THE DEFICIT HAWKS WILL
THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA TO ADD $5.5 TRILLION ON TOP OF IT.
THIS WON'T PRODUCE THE KIND OF GROWTH WE NEED TO PAY FOR THIS
THING. IT IS BASICALLY A WAY, FRANKLY,
TO HELP BUSINESS AND HELD A LOT OF VERY WEALTHY PEOPLE.
>> THROUGH IT ALL, IT STILL REMAINS AMAZING THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS ABLE OR DOESN'T CARE ABOUT THE PRESSURE BROUGHT
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét