dagblog - Comments for "Final Catfood Commission Report, Nauseatingly Titled 'The Moment of Truth'"

Hey Finance wonks! The Fed

we are stardust — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 22:58:59 +0000

In reply to Final Catfood Commission Report, Nauseatingly Titled 'The Moment of Truth'

Hey Finance wonks! The Fed released it's list of TAF borrowers under a court order from Bloomberg. George Washington has it. Lots lent to 'foreign' banks.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/12/guest-post-fed-data-shows-b-of-a-and-wells-fargo-biggest-borrowers-under-feds-emergency-lending-program-foreign-banks-also-borrowed-huge-amounts.html

I'll stick it onto a word

we are stardust — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:43:10 +0000

In reply to The tax reforms look similar

I'll stick it onto a word doc. and enlarge it. Thanks for the great link, Obey. Someone online this morning mentioned that the NYT has comments or announcements of the report, side by side with reports of riots in several countries in Europe over austerity, leading you to wonder why they think Americans won't fight back.

Oh. I forgot. Because we won't. Since 1973 we've been taking hits; guess we're used to it by now, though I wonder if there may be a tipping point. Maybe we're all like impoverished Catholics now: we defend the gold and jewel-encrusted icons in the Churches as proper tribute.

Now I can see: there was a song from the '40s or so: 'Aint We Got Fun?' with a couplet saying 'the rich get rich and the poor get(s) poorer'.

"They took my freakin'

we are stardust — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:31:48 +0000

In reply to http://www.youtube.com/watch?

"They took my freakin' kidney!!!" Poor Charlie... ;o(

The tax reforms look similar

Obey — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:21:19 +0000

In reply to Final Catfood Commission Report, Nauseatingly Titled 'The Moment of Truth'

The tax reforms look similar to the ones from the Chairmen's mark (except the three marginal rates are 8, 14, and 23% instead of 9, 15, 24%). And the Tax Policy Center gave the following estimate of the changes:

"when compared with current law, the Chairmen’s Mark would reduce after-tax income in the bottom two quintiles of the income distribution and would raise after-tax income in the top three quintiles, making the system on average less progressive."

So the poor will get poorer and the rich get richer. Which makes sense, since if there is one horrible injustice in the current system, its that the poor just aren't poor enough.

Mmmm, bipartisanship is wonderful, isn't it?

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/bowles-simpson.cfm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?

Anonymous — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:09:29 +0000

In reply to There's a unicorn in the

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5im0Ssyyus

I really had been planning a

we are stardust — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:28:57 +0000

In reply to Final Catfood Commission Report, Nauseatingly Titled 'The Moment of Truth'

I really had been planning a separate blog for the ideas embodied in this clip, but C's cartoon made me think this might be the day for it:

Yep; this one is a pip,

we are stardust — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:23:01 +0000

In reply to I don't understand how

Yep; this one is a pip, especially coming from these uber-wealthy capitalists:

"Working longer and saving more has significant positive implications for both individuals and society as a whole." They should have added: "and working more hours in day, and on Saturdays for free" (as many American workers have been doing, to increase their productivity and thus, their jobs.

I like your retraining retirees idea, though, Moat. ;o) I get that letter from SS every year showing me how little I'd receive from them if I retired in X years or Y years; they always kindly suggest to me that I might want to earn more money. That would be cool, except that they might have noticed that I haven't been able to work for three years now... ;o) Asshats.

As someone about to enter

MrSmith1 — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:18:09 +0000

In reply to Oh sure. We can justify

As someone about to enter official 'old man' status, is there away I can avoid the stomping? Puhleeeze?

There's a unicorn in the

cmaukonen — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:14:13 +0000

In reply to I don't understand how

There's a unicorn in the garden.

I don't understand how

moat — Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:02:48 +0000

In reply to Final Catfood Commission Report, Nauseatingly Titled 'The Moment of Truth'

I don't understand how broadening the tax base combined with a flatter tax rate could lead to a "just as progressive or more progressive tax" scheme than the one we have now. I see magic ponies frolicking in the front yard.

The proposal to get rid of all tax expenditures for corporations is exciting but the bath water should be checked for babies. A quick look at the list of tax expenditures (from those hippies at Brookings) show that the cost of real things are involved. If lowering the rate by x amount is done by transferring the cost to corporations and their customers, how does that maneuver liberate money to pay down the deficit? While there is money to be saved by closely examining the merits of these expenditures, getting rid of them as a class is the same thing as forbidding the government to create incentives of any kind. I suppose the finely tuned ethical code amongst corporations will fulfill the same function with lower total administrative cost. Win win.

I particularly enjoyed the Skinner Box rhetoric in the Social Security reform section:

Working longer and saving more has significant positive implications for both individuals and society as a whole. Yet the mixed signals sent to individuals often lead them to make less informed, and potentially precarious, choices. To help correct this, we propose directing SSA to provide better information to the public on the full implications of various retirement decisions, with an eye toward encouraging delayed retirement and enhanced levels of retirement savings. We encourage SSA to consider behavioral economics approaches (such as structured choice and others based in sound science) when providing this information.

Maybe we could put retirees back to work by training them to be retirement counselers. It hardly needs to be said that we will need to reduce management spending in the agency before introducing so much stimulation.