Bush tax policy won't pay for Obama spending policy
Of course, it didn’t pay for Bush spending policy, either, but the point is there’s even more of a disconnect between the revenues raised under the Obama-proposed Bush tax policy extended and projected Obama-proposed spending.Skip to next paragraph
'EconomistMom' (Diane Lim Rogers) is Chief Economist of the Concord Coalition, a non-partisan, non-profit organization which advocates for fiscal responsibility, and the mom of four (amazing) kids to whom she dedicates her work. She’s been blogging since Mother’s Day 2008.
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
This video clip from CNN’s IOUSA Solutions special (simply titled “Federal taxes fall short of spending” and featuring me on the panel and my boss Bob Bixby in the film) makes this simple point: There’s a huge gap between spending and revenues, and no one solution, and in fact no “simple” solution (such as trimming only the defense budget or cutting only “waste, fraud and abuse”) will suffice. And on the eve of the dreaded “Tax Day”, this should remind us that revenues, i.e., Taxes, will (unfortunately) have to come up. But again, as only one part of the not-so-easy solution.
(Oh, and by the way, despite this story in yesterday’s Washington Post, I do think that gap between spending and revenues is still “huge”–even if it turns out to be “only” $1.3 trillion and not the Administration’s originally forecasted $1.6 trillion. That was yet another way in which the Obama Administration seems to be continuing the federal budget practice of the prior Administration in ways I just don’t “get.”)
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.