| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
My Budget Priorities, and Yours?
I'm tired of hearing the Robert Gibbs, the Obama team, and my liberal friends claiming we're criticizing Obama's budget but that we don't have any cogent policy solutions of our own. Newt has always been a font of ideas, almost too much so. So I'm starting this thread to ask, if you were President, what policy and budget priorities would YOU be sending to Congress.
Brave fellow and glutton for punishment that I am, I'll go first. It's by no means complete (no housing policy for example), but it's a start.
My message to Congress is in four parts. First, stabilize the economic ecosystem and stop the fear that's spreading now to all sectors of the economy as they assess the impact of the recession combined with radical reforms like health care reform and energy policy.
- Table the cap-and-trade debate until economic growth returns for at least two straight quarters.
- Table major health care reform til 2010, but help the uninsured and our emergency rooms through Medicaid and S-Chip, and continue discussion of Community Health Centers as a small-scale solution targeting medical services to the uninsured.
Second, we need to have tax policy that attracts investors back to the markets and allows for capital formation that will drive business creation, expansion, and jobs in the private sector -- and keeps some money in the pockets of individuals so they can spend, save, or pay down debt.
- Permanent indexing or elimination of alternative minimum tax
- Leave Bush tax cuts in place til 2012
- Cut or eliminate the death tax
- 5-year tax holiday for long-term cap gains
- 5% reduction for short-term cap gains
Third, the federal bureaucracy needs to manage the budget responsibily. In business, millions of managers are challenged every year to reduce expenses while maintaining output. In bad times, those reductions are steeper, and pay is frozen or cut. Time for government to do the same. Items 6-7 are already in the Obama budget.
- The President should defer his salary for two years, be an example to those greedy CEOs.
- Implement a 2-year freeze on Congressional compensation (including staff)
- 5% across the board reduction in administrative and operating expenses for all federal departments and incent managers to acheive these reduction through bonuses
- Freeze all discretionary spending, except for unemployment compensation
- 50% cut to travel and entertainment budgets in the legislative and federal branches
- Account for supplemental spending estimates (wars in Iraq, Afghanistan) in the budget
- Means-testing for agriculture subsidies
Fourth, we need an energy policy that protects the environment and improves our security by expanding the role of non-fossil fuels in our energy mix, while keeping costs low.
- Increase the tax write-off for installation of solar panels from 30 to 65% for residences and businesses
- Fund and accelerate licensing to build 10 new nuclear power plants in 3-5 years to power the electric grid and hybrid cars
- Provide new incentives for domestic natural gas production and use it as a transitional energy source
- ddemilo's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
And one more...
Under Budget:
8. To improve productivity and performance, require managers to manage out non-performers every year through stack-ranking and other methods, to 4-5% of the federal workforce. Tie execution to bonus.
Easier said than done
In the USAF, we have a system called WAPS... or Weighted Airman Promotion System. A large amount of the points in this system come from EPRs, or Enlisted Performance Reports. 1 is the lowest, 5 is the highest.
Now, according to what a 5 actually should be, they should be far and few between. However, 5's are the norm, and to receive less than that means that you're not measuring up to the needs of the Air Force (a severe detriment to your career).
As a supervisor, your airman may only TRULY be a 4, but you will see others who you think should be rated as 3's that end up with 5's. Will you give your troop a 4, knowing that the 3 will have a better chance at promotion?
Now, I'm not saying it's a horrible system, or advocating for another. I'm just pointing out the cons associated with stack-ranking type systems.
Good Point
Stack-ranking is not my favorite system and it can punish managers who actually build great teams. I've experienced it at several companies I've worked it, and only one had it right -- with well defined skill profiles for jobs, measurable performance, and decisions made not within a department, but across departments to avoid punishing the strongest teams.
33% of americans were uninsured in the past two years.
for some amount of time (including me!).
I think SCHIP and Medicaid would need to get a LOT bigger....
ddemilo, I can agree with
ddemilo, I can agree with most you say. This is what what I have to offer.
My own stimulus long and short
ddemilo, However I do
ddemilo, However I do disagree that Republicans had much to offer. Gingrich offered the most. Most other republicans have offered tax cuts and cuts in spending, which is nothing much to offer, It is much more than that, and it is managing the economy. If there are problems, then they need to be fixed. If free trade is the order of the day, then fix the problems that come with it. Don't destroy the middle class. And that is where the republicans failed.
You really expect me to take this seriously?
Let me parphrase your address to Congress:
First, and I want to make sure that the American people know that this is my very highest priority. On two major crises facing our nation, climate change and health care, I stand with my fellow Republicans and say loudly, "We will do nothing!"
Our second highest priority, as always, is to insure that the income gap between poor and rich continues to get even wider. To that end, I propose numerous tax cuts for the rich. This is our most sacred principle and pledge as Republicans.
To help spur our sagging economy, my spending freeze stimulus plan will spend a grand total no dollars. What you got right now, I promise you for the next four years. So expect more of the same, that you already know and love, for some time to come.
And on energy, I propose developing no new solutions and continuing to suck the Saudi teat until it is bone dry. Hopefully the sweet black crude will last until the end of my term. If not, I will propose other non-solutions after all the oil is burned. Necessity is, after all, the mother of invention.
I proudly say the, sameness you have come to expect will be even more same like in my administration. I echo to you the words of my political mentor Micheal Corleone, "Senators you can have my answer now. It is NOTHING!"
(Cue raucous applause)
First, I reject all of your
First, I reject all of your premises. They are, in fact, the typical straw men -- "tax cuts for the rich" -- that Obama uses to oppose something that no one is proposing. Did you actually read my post or are you too busy copying your MoveOn talking points?
No capital formation -- no business -- no jobs. It's that simple. What you tax you get less of, and when you tax capital, you get lower economic growth and job growth. You can rarely raise the price of something without reducing demand (even iPods).
Nuclear power plants don't suck the Saudi teat. Neither does domestic gas exploration, or massive acceleration for solar panels. Wind is not much of an option here b/c it's simply not scaleable the way the other technologies are.
I do like the reference to Michael C, however. He also said:
“Discontent for money is just a trick of the rich to keep the poor without it.“
You support
Extending the Bush tax cuts, eliminating estate taxes, and reducing capital gains taxes. If thats not tax cuts for the rich, what is?
I'm a small business owner. I started the business with money I saved from my days working for somebody else. More taxes paid by the wealthy and fewer taxes paid by the working and middle classes will mean more capital formation within the working and middle classes which will lead to more small businesses springing out of the working and middle classes.
Enough of this top-down fantasy.
You Need Other People's Money Too
Cap gains tax affects the growth and value of every retirement plan in the country -- state and private and union pensions, as well as IRAs and 401Ks. Tax more and you get less savings.
I appreciate the need of middle class people to save money so they can become independent consultants, and create small businesses and such. I'm one of them.
But most entrepreneurs need other people's monthy to build businesses.
Some small businesses get big through venture capital or other forms of investment, or through borrowing, all of which requires capital formation -- and by that I mean the pool of investors that exists in our equity markets. When those businesses scale, employment scales too.
It is better to get other people's money through investment, rather than state confiscation.
I am amazed at how hostile, or thoughtless people have become about the notion of private property in this country. The country was founded on a revolution fought, in large part, to protect private property from government confiscation. All of a sudden, we seem to think it's fine to acquire wealth by slapping the label "rich" on others, and invoking the power of the state to take their money.
As for the death tax, $3MM is not a lot to leave behind, esp if it's your family business. At one time, this started out as a way to redistribute massive estates. A 45% tax is confiscatory -- I don't care how rich you are, what gives the government the right to take half of what you owned?
State confiscation
Pray tell, what is the magic number above which a tax becomes "state confiscation"?
read some Adam smith.
he'll educate you on why estate taxes are Wonderful Things.
Cap Gains does NOT bloody affect every retirement account!!!!!!! Roth: no (only income taxes). 401k: no, you only pay taxes at the end, and those are income taxes.
Top-Down Fantasy?
As a small business owner, surely you must know your customers, and where some of the get their money. Who hires plumbers, contractors, landscapers, eats at restaurants, shops at grocery stores? Does your trade improve or suffer when the big factory or corporation down the street lays off workers -- or when one opens for business?
Top-down is not a fantasy, it is a living, working reality -- and one you can see playing out right now as investors sell their stocks, and stop hiring, impacting small businesses all across the country.
We've got to stop this business of demonizing the investor class. They are indeed the cause of our problems right now -- but they are also the solution.
My customers get their money
My customers get their money from the salaries, which have been stagnant for years while their healthcare costs take an ever increasing portion of their earnings.
I'm not very knowledgable of
I'm not very knowledgable of the tax code (and unfortunately, most definitely not a member of the investor class!) but I agree with the concept that domestic business investment should be strongly encouraged through it. My biggest question about extending the Bush tax cuts or a tax holiday is whether the U.S. economy will benefit or whether a good portion will actually flow into foreign investment? Is there any way to do that -- maximize incentives for U.S. over foreign investment? I apologize if I sound hopelessly clueless but would appreciate learning more. Is there any downside to favoring U.S. over foreign investment?
I couldn't fault the investor class for investing in foreign concerns if that's where they see the best ROI. But at the same time, how does it help the U.S. economy recover if a good portion of the money flows out? I can understand the concept that even foreign investment could indirectly or ultimately help the U.S. economy (e.g., successful foreign businesses can hire workers who then travel to the U.S. and benefit tourism, etc.) but I'm interested in any perspective that will help me evaluate various tax proposals.
I will say this for the current crisis -- I've observed much more active interest in economic and political education, myself included. That has to be a good thing.
In theory you are correct,
In theory you are correct, but looking back into the last 8 years Bush had tax cuts which did not trickle down, Bush had deficits and debt, free trade in which our middle class jobs are going overseas, cities and states going broke, we are back into a recession, we sent 1 trillion dollars to Iraq-a drain on our economy, Bush neglected the infrastructure, Bush attacked science, and Bush did not invest in our future.
I will give you credit in having a plan. While Obama is fumbling around, we already know that Bush destroyed this country.
For me it was 8 years of tax cuts for the rich, my job went to Mexico and my boyhood hometown is losing business, and it was laissez-faire thereafter as nothing got done and none of the problems were recognized. And this is why the Midwest voted for Obama. People want the president to do something. Of course we know that markets dictate everything. Just the same, ignoring problems is a certain failure.