Interesting question.

HSG — Mon, 12 Oct 2015 17:04:00 +0000

In reply to Good points. So am I reading

Interesting question. Certainly opposition to the TPP is now associated with progressives so Hillary is, according to Marcus we can suppose, too far to the left on trade. Opposition to the Cadillac Tax is harder to mark on the left-right spectrum. But generally, I would suppose, the more liberal you are the more you oppose it. Yes, it will increase the net income tax paid by some corporations. But, only corporations that provide generous healthcare plans to their employees will be harmed by it.

If the tax is imposed, the ultimate result is likely to be a reduction in the quality of healthcare insurance some workers are now receiving. Unions seem most opposed to this tax while neo-liberal economists support it. This suggests to me that Marcus would view Clinton's anti-tax position as, like her anti-TPP statement, too far to the left.

Good points. So am I reading

Oxy Mora — Mon, 12 Oct 2015 14:42:29 +0000

In reply to What Ruth Marcus and Brookings Don't Get About Microeconomics

Good points. So am I reading Marcus right?---Clinton is too far Right on healthcare, and too far Left on TTP? Seems Hillary is always out of line.

Have to say that I am left with the instinctive reaction, when my progeny are struggling to meet deductibles, that the existence of a family health plan in excess of 27,000 don't seem right.

dagblog - Comments for "What Ruth Marcus and Brookings Don't Get About Microeconomics"

Interesting question.

Good points. So am I reading