Ryan punts on tough NPR questions over deficit, disappearing middle class deductions, and then just lies.

The GOP tax cut takedown looked something like this:

And the debt goes up a trillion dollars each and every year, not just once. Here's a link to Marketplace:

When NPR confronted Paul Ryan with tough economic questions posed by all the non-partisan analysis, he couldn't answer the questions, just repeated the same old supply-side myths that Oklahoma and Kansas recently confirmed were just not true. Below a condensed audio version and transcript:  

NPR's Steve Inskeep: So that was your goal, was a middle-class tax cut. But what does it say that — in practice according to independent analyses, I mean you do have winners and losers, not everybody gains, businesses gain, people with large estates to leave to their heirs gain, high-income people gain — but a lot of middle-income people do not gain in terms of money.

Paul Ryan: I disagree with that. The average tax cut for a middle-class family is going to be $1,182.

NPR's Steve Inskeep: Average, meaning not everybody.

________________________________________________________________________________

NPR's Steve Inskeep: At the same time, a lot of deductions go away and it's not necessarily what you'd think of as a special interest deduction. We've reported that 9 million people or so use a deduction for medical expenses, excessive medical expenses, and that deduction goes away. A lot of them are ordinary people with kids who have severe trouble.

Paul Ryan: But it's typically a higher income person ... the whole point of this is, and the analysis is very clear, this is an average tax cut for every taxpayer on average. You can't run a number for every single 330 million people in America. But it's designed to provide tax relief across the board. 

________________________________________________________________________________

NPR's Steve Inskeep: 'Lily Batchelder of New York University took some numbers from the Joint Committee of Taxation, bipartisan part of Congress as you know very well, and concluded that something like 100 million households in this country under the House bill, and even more under the Senate bill, would either get no tax cut or would get a tax increase. Does that sound right to you?"

Paul Ryan: "No, it doesn't sound right unless it's a person that's not paying taxes already. I haven't seen this analysis so it's hard for me to go into it. But because of the Senate budget rules, there are some sunsets in the law, in the later part of the decade where some of that tax relief goes away."

NPR's Steve Inskeep: "It gets worse in later years, that's true."

Paul Ryan: "...if history is any guide, Congress has a very strong practice in history of not removing a middle-class tax relief like we didn't in 2010."

NPR's Steve Inskeep: "But help me understand that ... trusting that a later Congress would fix it, which means the deficit gets worse or it doesn't get fixed. Why does that make sense?"

Paul Ryan: "Well first of all history, if ... But I'd also attest to the fact that this is going to produce economic growth...."

_______________________________________________________________________________

NPR's Steve Inskeep: "You cited a study finding that that economic growth can come from the business tax cut. We could also cite a study from the Institute for Policy Studies casting questions or raising questions about that. We don't want to go back and forth with studies, but you do know that it is possible that businesses will take their tax savings and simply give it to stockholders in the form of dividends, or simply hold onto it in cash or buy back stock. What if they do? Does it matter to you?"

Paul Ryan: "That's still not an excuse not to put American businesses on a more level playing field with the rest of the world.

_________________________________________________________________________________

NPR's Steve Inskeep: "Why is it okay to increase the deficit, as this tax bill will do?"

Paul Ryan: "Actually I don't think it will increase the deficit. That's my entire point. I don't think this will increase the deficit ... We need — we have far more work to do to control spending ... but if we don't pass this tax law, we will not get the kind of economic growth we can get in this country. And if you want to get the deficit and the debt under control, control spending, grow the economy. This grows the economy.

NPR's Steve Inskeep: "If you'll forgive me, Stephen Mnuchin, the treasury secretary, has also said that this will spur so much economic growth it will pay for itself. It will bring in more tax revenue."

Paul Ryan: "I think that's quite possible."

NPR's Steve Inskeep:  "He said that, but the Treasury Department has been unable to produce an analysis proving that."

Paul Ryan: "Yeah, I really think we're at a global economic focal point ... if we do this and put America at the head of the pack ... we will get much faster economic growth. And that faster economic growth clearly produces more revenue, more jobs, more take-home pay. That's a good thing. That's why I feel confident this is going to make a very very positive difference in the lives of millions of Americans."

Debate Over: Republicans choose Corporations over People! Period!

It's kinda ironic that those resentful "forgotten" voters everywhere are unfailingly behind Trump and Trump wannabe/impersonator Scott Walker. The Republican tax reform bill pushed by Paul Ryan just gave us our epiphanic moment. But will low information trolls be moved by their own instinctive twinges of self-preservation to change their minds?

Washington Democrat Suzan Delbene offered up a simple but striking comparison between the two parties. Can the Democratic message be this clear, and be repeated, in 2018?






Check out Jakes Economic TA Funhouse for analysis. Here's a taste:

As the House GOP tax bill was being debated in Committee this week, we were treated to this masterpiece of researching and framing questions by US Rep. Suzanne DelBene (D-Wash). In this clip Rep. DelBene is asking the Chief of the Joint Committee on Taxation (the independent organization in Congress that gives information about tax bills) about what types of expense deductions go away for individual workers like teachers and fire fighters who buy their own supplies, and contrasts it with the fact that corporations would still be able to write off the exact same expenses.

Tax Cuts = Jobs? Despite the body of evidence proving tax cuts don't create jobs, Republicans are sticking with their old mind-numbing talking point, because it's their biggest argument for trickle-down economics. NPR's Marketplace rips that to shreds:

Supply Side Failure won't stop Ideologically Pure Republicans from tanking Economy, Increasing Debt!!!

True ideological believers in supply-side, voodoo economics, know deep down that if their idea continues to fail as it did in Kansas recently, at least they can make the argument that there now isn't enough money to fund our safety net programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. It's still a win.

But the proof of the failed Kansas Comeback, orchestrated by Gov. Sam Brownback, leaves no doubt supply-side will be a Trump disaster...to paraphrase, 'a bigger disaster than we've ever seen:'

Brownback pitched his plan as a test of conservative policy ... Kansas has become Exhibit A in the prosecution of the Trump tax cuts. It's routinely cited as evidence the new GOP proposal won’t grow the economy or pay for itself, and that proposed business tax reduction similar to Brownback’s will create a new loophole for wealthy individuals to exploit. 

Much more than Brownback ever did, Trump's team is promising that explosive growth will make up for the cost of their cuts. "The tax plan was basically an experiment in supply-side economics," said Heidi Holliday, executive director at Kansas Center for Economic Growth.

Over the next five years, state and local governments battled over a dwindling revenue supply ...Job growth, meanwhile, lagged behind the national average and neighboring states. "The empirical evidence was clear that revenues fell off a cliff, especially individual income tax revenues," Kenneth Kriz, who has studied the plan's impact as director of the Kansas Public Finance Center at Wichita State University.

GOP state Sen. Barbara Bollier said,  "Everything can be traced back to this governor and this ideology and this idea that if you cut, cut, cut and don’t bring revenue in it will all work. Well, it ain’t working. We’ve seen many times in the past this idea that if you just cut taxes for the wealthy you’ll grow everything. That’s not true."

Okay, so if you take one thing away from this...

While Trump administration officials are making spectacular claims about how their tax cuts will produce more revenue once the economy takes off, mainstream economists overwhelmingly say they will add significantly to the debt.

Next Up? Not enough Money For Medicare, Medicaid and Social Securityllll:

WHA: The plan is expected to increase the deficit over ten years. For Jon Peacock, director of the Wisconsin Budget Project, this deficit increase is a risk for residents in the long run.

"Once they pass this tax plan, and increase the federal deficit by $1.5 trillion, then they’re going to say they have no choice but to follow through with cuts in popular programs," he said.

Georgia Republican Rep. Buddy Carter explained on NPR how "faith" in supply-side economics can give you the greatest false sense of security ever. NOTE: Carter exemplifies the GOP envy side of politics, by wanting to bring those evil liberal high tax states down to the level of those cheap southern states, as a way of leveling the playing field. Carter has it upside-down since high tax states end up subsidizing low tax states, by not getting near the federal dollars back for every dollar they send in.

Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers?

The Atlantic: It’s not just that some states are getting way more in return for their federal tax dollars, but the disproportionate amount of federal aid that some states receive allows them to keep their own taxes artificially low. That's the argument WalletHub analysts make.

If you want to see how you'll do with the GOP tax cuts in general, not including the cuts that will phase out leaving the lower and middle class paying higher taxes later on, check this out:

Business Insider: Here's how you can figure out how much you will save on your taxes: Start by finding your 2016 tax return. Look at line 37 on page one, that's your adjusted gross income from last year. Don't worry about what that is exactly, just know you need that number.

Then, take a look at the second page. Lines 40 and 42 are your deductions and exemptions from 2016. What the Republicans are proposing is collapsing those into one big standard deduction: $12,000 if you're single, $24,000 if you're married filing jointly. You can compare what you paid last year to those numbers to see which one is better for you.

Next, take your adjusted gross income, that's line 37 from page one, and subtract out either the $12,000 standard deduction or the $24,000, depending on if you're single or married, to come up with your taxable income under Trump's proposed plan.

Compare that number to line 43 on your 2016 tax return. That's the amount you paid taxes on last year. The lower this number is, the less you pay in taxes.

Once you know your estimated taxable income using Trump's new plan, you can actually run the numbers using the tax brackets they've laid out. Simple as that! Then you can compare how much you would pay in taxes under Trump's plan to what you paid in 2016 and that's how much you could end up saving or paying more in 2018.

Are you ready for a Supply-Side-Voodoo-Trickle-Down Economy, without health care, environmental and Wall Street regulations?

Warning!!! Trump and the Republican House and Senate are about to usher in a full scale switch to supple side economics. 

Supply side-voodoo-trickle down economics is the Republican Party. Fortunately for us, this failed policy is now out there for everybody to see, thanks to a number of troubling red state examples.

Kansas Comeback Kid Gov. Sam Brownback took trickle-down to its illogical limit and failed. Apparently, this is what the angry, frustrated, ignored, left behind American voters wanted, and will get in January. Guess they showed us..."We won:"  

Kansas: In February 2015, three years into the supply-side economics experiment that

would upend a once steady Midwestern economy, a budget hole appeared in Kansas’ finances. To fill it, Gov. Brownback took $45 million in public education funding ... took highway money to plug it ... state money for Medicaid coverage went into the hole, but the gap continued to grow.

Today, the state’s budget hole is $345 million and threatens the foundation of this state, which was supposed to be the setting for a grand economic expansion ... The yawning deficits were caused by huge tax cuts that were supposed to set the economy roaring. They didn’t. The budget shortfalls have been felt across the state, particularly by public schools ... Brownback has repeatedly pledged his faith in the free market. “We’re going to continue to grow the economy.”

A stern lesson in theory versus reality to other states contemplating the same free-market ideas. After five years of an economic crusade that has left its originator, Brownback, as the least popular governor in the nation.

You've heard all of these theories and empty promises before:

The state would thrive, he pledged, because the tax cuts would help keep businesses and smart, young Kansans in the state. It will pave the way to the creation of tens of thousands of new jobs, bring tens of thousands of people to Kansas, and help make our state the best place in America to start and grow a small business,” Brownback wrote in 2012. “It will leave more than a billion dollars in the hands of Kansans. An expanding economy and growing population will directly benefit our schools and local governments.”

Nope, didn't happen.

Revenue from income tax collections plummeted 22 percent. A separate repeal of taxes on partnerships and limited liability companies meant the surrender of 30 percent of state revenue. State revenue estimators project receipts ... down 7.4 percent from this year’s estimate ... the state did increase the sales tax ... the second-highest sales tax in the nation ... (but) Deflation is dropping the prices of goods and the taxes the state collects on them.

The Brownback solution, kill the messenger. Its what you don't know that will hurt you. And yet, this is what government looks like under Republican control:

Tired of the bleating horn of bad news, in September Brownback silenced a quarterly economic evaluation of the state that counted employment, unemployment, personal income and energy production, and consistently illustrated the state’s plunging revenues. He had done so before, in August 2015, when he ordered a halt to a semiannual economic report. “A lot of people were confused” by the reports, said Nicole Randall, a spokeswoman for the Kansas Department of Commerce.

Cutting the people out of knowing what was really happening economically in Kansas was only a start. Purging State Supreme Court Justices for defending the language of state Constitution was also a weapon Republicans have no problem using:  

Conservative groups supporting Brownback responded by pushing five Supreme Court justices into brutal, expensive retention races to keep their seats. The targeted justices were retained by voters and are expected to rule this month on the adequacy and fairness of the public education system in a landmark case, Gannon v. Kansas, filed by four of the state’s poorest school districts.

Supply-Side Here we Come: Voters took a chance on Trump's promise to change things, essentially draining the swamp of just Democrats. Now the hardships are about to get dramatically worse, while the nation preoccupies itself debating the latest outrageous Trump tweet. Thank you America.  

Trump's Basket of Deplorables Economic Agenda spelled out....

With the "Basket of Deplorables Party" in charge of 30 U.S. states, with almost six years in control of the House and a couple of years in the Senate (obstructed everything before that), it's still amazing to hear them complain about the Democrats being in charge (see below). I'm sorry, what...? According to Rep. Paul Ryan:

“In more and more areas of American life, President Obama has given government the starring role and pushed the people into the wings. He might consider this a success, but here's the true measure of progressivism: After eight years of it, the vast majority of Americans say we're on the wrong track.”

Whoa, it's still the Democrats fault, despite the "Basket of Deplorables Party" inability to agree on policy between the House and Senate?  

The End Game: One Party Dictatorship: That's not an exaggeration either, after listening to the Trump party economic team, headed up by right wing loon Stephen Moore. I edited together his to-do list for Trump, who might eventually roll out this extremist one party agenda, reversing everything the even remotely smells of liberalism.

UPDATE 9/15/16: Here's a link to Trump himself bragging about the cuts and breakdown of government oversight of the environment and business.

Just imagine Democrats making these same declarations. Oh, and believe it or not, more unaffordable tax cuts that increased the debt they hate so much:

1. "We are going to present the biggest tax cut...and it's going to be a supply side thing, and I just get that off my chest."

2. "I just don't think that income inequality will work this time for the Democrats...the biggest problem they have with that narrative, is that they've been in charge for the last 8 years."

3. "If we had had the kind of recovery we had under Reagan under Obama, we'd have $3.5 trillion GDP this year." (see the effect of austerity in the graph below vs Reagan spending, big  surprise)

Boy do Republicans hate moving into this century developing new and better sources of energy:

4. "If we get this right, and we promote American energy, and I'm not talking about building windmills, I'm talking about using our coal, our oil and our natural gas and nuclear power..."

5. "I think Donald Trump has a great chance to go these industrial unions and say, 'I'm the one who wants to expand the jobs for your unions, it's these lunatics over here like Tom Snyder and Hillary Clinton who want to put you out of business."

Nice to know conservative special interests would be taking over our courts:

6. "One of the big concerns, has always been, who he was going to put on the Supreme Court...I want to allay your concerns, if you look at those 11 people that he...you know suggested, those were all people suggested by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation. So you can't much better than that..." "We could have the most conservative court in history." 

7. "...it's the people he (Obama) had put in these institutions, whether it's the FDIC, or the FDA, or the IRS. He has infiltrated every single agency with hardcore anti-business leftists..."

As we all know, liberals are the enemy of the state.

Moore touts the wonders of bankruptcy under Trump. Oh, remember how horrible it was when Obama took a chance and invested in Solyndra, just before it went bankrupt? Oh, never mind.

8. "When the left attacks him for bankruptcies for example, ah, it really signifies they don't know the first thing about business...you learn a lot from your failures, right? Failures essential for innovation and growth."

9. "Our school system is a total abomination...what I told Donald Trump was just take the $50 billion in the Dept. of Education budget and let's give 10 million $5,000 vouchers to the lowest income people in America."

 10. "And when Obama says you didn't build that, and Hillary Clinton says that business don't create jobs, didn't create jobs, that kinda that whole attitude of being anti-business is sucking the lifeblood out of our economy."

Janesville buckles under to Big Business, now a Million Dollars in the Hole.

Thanks to lower business property tax assessments in Janesville, the city is now $1 million short.

WISC has yet to post the story beyond the story below, but you couldn't find a better example of big business tax cuts that are eating it's host city alive:



Rocknetroots has been on top of this and blogged the following background story from Janesville's freeloading big business conservatives. Guess what, there is a cause and effect:

Not too long ago, the Janesville Gazette posted anexclusive article about how some Janesville area big box retailers and other businesses are putting the squeeze on Janesville taxpayers by using a "dark store" argument to win substantially lower property tax bills. Some received settlements while others won lower property assessed values, refunds or both. the Gazette's parent label, Bliss Communications, hired a tax lawyer to, as lawyers are described in their editorial about the retailers, to "prey on the city" by filing an objection to their own property tax ... (resulting in) a $30,000 lower annual tax bill for the media company. 

Kansas Supply Side Comeback Crashes.

Like all the other red state economies, tax and spending cuts have produced stagnant "comebacks" and proof beyond a shadow of a doubt supply side doesn't work. States that did have small surpluses came at the expense of defunding public investments and everything else.

The grand experiment, the Kansas Comeback, is exhibit A:

It’s been about six years since Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) announced his plan to conduct “a real-live experiment” with his state’s economy. The far-right Kansan, working with a GOP-led legislature, would cut taxes far beyond what the state could afford, slash public investments, and wait for prosperity to flourish across every corner of the state.

None of that has happened. Not only have Kansas’ job growth and economic growth lagged behind neighboring states, but a couple of years ago the state’s bond rating was downgraded because of the fiscal mess Brownback created.

Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum wrote last month: “This, of course, has caused conservatives to think long and hard about their contention that cutting taxes on the rich and slashing bloated budgets will supercharge the economy.

In 2012, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said of Brownback’s radical economic experiment, “This is exactly the sort of thing we want to do here, in Washington.” Oddly enough, I haven’t heard McConnell repeat this line lately.

Moral and Ethical Choice? Kansas Republican tax cuts Cut Children’s programs, road work, education funding.

It's coming Wisconsin....

Democrats keep waiting for that tipping point, when die hard Republican voters realize supply side economics doesn’t working. Don’t hold your breath for their moral enlightenment.

Kansas Governor Sam Brownback led the way, prompting similar cuts by Scott Walker, although technically, Walker cut college funding before Brownback. Even Republican legislators in Kansas are now hoping to reverse some of the cuts, like the ones Brownback (and Walker) made for farmers and manufacturing:

Some Republicans want to reverse a key policy that exempted 330,000 farmers and business owners from personal income taxes. Republicans in some other states have watched the Kansas tax-cutting experiment closely … a way to generate business investment and economic growth. But it hasn't worked out as envisioned and the state has struggled to balance its budget ever since.  

Again, failure just results in more cuts:

Brownback prefers the borrowing backed by part of the state's tobacco revenues, which now are set aside for children's programs.

The state Department of Transportation announced it would delay 25 major highway projects set to begin before July 2018 ... carry forward $17 million in immediate cuts ordered on state university campuses last month into the next fiscal year that begins in July.

Wisconsin State Sen. Alberta Darling exposed right wing thinking when a reporter asked if tax cuts fail, producing large deficits, what next?

Darling: "Well when you see that coming then you further have to reduce spending."

It's a no fail plan for failure. There's no down side to their argument. Failure is rewarded:

It was the fourth consecutive semiannual forecast to be more pessimistic than its predecessor. Tax collections have fallen short of expectations 11 of the past 12 months.

We're getting the same results in Walker's Wisconsin. And no lesson learned. What a surprise.

Trickle Down Voodoo Economic disaster in Kentucky too. Thank you Gov. Brownback.

While the press feeds on the distractions thrown out there by Trump, the consequences of actual Republican policy on everyday Americans continues to be ignored. 

Republicans would lose miserably in November if Americans knew how badly Republicans ran their states into the ground, using supply side economics. At the least, conservatives would have to reevaluate or even replace the party's adopted platform completely, which for them would be way too much work.

You've read about the nightmarish Louisiana experiment under Jindal, get ready for the Kansas disaster. The Kansas "real-live experiment," the term used by Gov. Sam Brownback to describe his supply side plan, was supposed to be the template for the nation. Wow. Seth Meyer's delivered the bad news:



Just in case this video is ever removed, here are parts of the transcript:

We look at what Gov. Sam Brownback did to Kansas and his followers are doing in other states like Oklahoma and Louisiana. “In the last few years, Kansas has become somewhat of a laboratory for Conservative Gov. Sam Brownback who cut taxes for the wealthy and completely eliminated income taxes for small businesses. A plan he boldly described this way … ‘Real-live experiment’ is a terrible sales pitch for something. Brownback claimed this plan was ‘designed to show the rest of the country that these policies could work on a national level. He even told the Wall Street Journal in 2013, ‘My focus is to create a red-state model that allows the Republican ticket to say, ‘See we’ve got a different way, and it works.' He also claimed it would work fast calling it a ‘small business accelerator’ where you literally remove all taxes to spur growth.

The problem, we now know, is that it didn’t work. It failed so spectacularly that Kansas’s economy was downgraded by the S&P. Supporters claimed the plan would generate $323 million in new revenue but it actually produced a $688 million loss. They’re so desperate for cash they even auctioned off pornography and sex toys from a company that owed back taxes and whose property they seized.

Brownback claimed his ‘experiment’ needed more time to work and, surprisingly, voters gave him that time. It still didn’t work. It got worse. So, surely, Brownback raised taxes to cover the shortfall. No. There will be no tax increases. Instead, Brownback decided to balance the budget on the backs of the state’s children, slicing off $106 million in funding and moving $50 million from another fund that pays for Head Start and preschool.

The sad thing is that most Kansas taxpayers don’t even want the cuts Brownback made for their businesses. Last week, the Topeka Capitol Journal reported business owners urged Kansas state House members to raise their own taxes. Asking to have the state raise your taxes is unheard of. If even the small business owners of Kansas want their taxes raised, the results of the experiment are in. Republicans want to replicate these policies on a national level, but even when you buy couch cleaner they tell you to try it on a small patch of fabric first and that’s what happened here. Kansas was the small patch of fabric and not only did the cleaner not work the couch exploded.”

Trickle Down Voodoo Economic disaster in Louisiana under "Idiot" Jindal, so says Republican.

While stories like this keep rolling in, the national press doesn't get the connection between every Republican state and those that are tanking economically. Supply side is failing big time. 

Even though it's only one Republican sheriff asking for a reassessment of GOP policies, I'll take it:

Republican Sheriff Newell Normand might be a good ol’ boy from Jefferson Parish in Louisiana, but that didn’t stop him from lobbing a dose of reality at the Metropolitan Crime Commission’s annual awards luncheon on Tuesday. According to a video of the speech posted by WUVE, Normand bad-mouthed the GOP’s Beltway establishment and elected officials, notorious tax cutter Grover Norquist and called former Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal an “idiot,” equating him to cult leader Jim Jones.

Normand fully admits that he endorsed and supported Jindal when he ran for governor, but that Jindal’s leadership destroyed the state that Normand holds dear. 

“What a mess. Bobby Jindal was a better cult leader than Jim Jones. We drank the elixir for eight years. We remained in a conscious state. We walked to the edge of the cliff and we jumped off and he watched us and guess what? Unlike Jim Jones he did not swallow the poison. What a shame.

We have to just say no! I’m a Republican but I’m not a hypocrite. We have to look at ourselves critically as a party and figure out where we are and what we’re going to be about. We do not need to face the stupidity of our leadership as it relates to how we’re going to face balancing this budget and talking about these silly issues because we’re worried about what Grover Norquist thinks. To hell with Grover Norquist! I don’t care about Grover Norquist!

We’re worried about the ATR report card. And I have to listen to my Republican counterparts talk about gobbledigook. Blah, blah blah… And I’m so sick and tired of hearing: Obama, Obama, Obama. You know how much intellect it takes to blame something on somebody else? This much! Propose a solution. Work together.” He closed by comparing politics to being married and asked how many people in the audience refuse to compromise in their marriages.

 Here's part of the address by the new Louisiana Democratic Governor, John Bel Edwards with the really bad news:

Ditka: "Obama is the worst president we've ever had." Really?

If they didn't make Obama's presidency sound like a major disaster, Republicans would have nothing to build their fantasy world agenda around. Unfortunately for them, they've had to construct an elaborate lie about Obama's record to present their side of the argument, to make it look good.

Who better than former Bears coach Mike Ditka to sum up their disconnect with reality:

After six years of saying this, even George W. is remember more fondly, despite 9/11 and the Great Recession (seriously, what does it take to receive a failing grade on the right):

That contrasts with Obama's actual record and policies, despite GOP obstruction:

Or his administrations unmistakable jobs record:

Republican supply-side economics has a record of keeping wages low, as seen in the charts below:

Once upon a time, higher taxes were an incentive for businesses to reinvest some of their profits, and lower their tax burden. That's why we saw growth in the 50's and 60's. Businesses then increased wages, which increased demand, which prompted job growth: 

But after 40 years of Reagan economics, no one remembers what made the U.S. an economic super power.

Republican Presidential Candidates Promise to cut Taxes between $7 trillion to $10 trillion, while also Balancing the Budget by Paying Off Debt...with what?

In anticipation of the Republican attack on Bernie Sanders supposed budget busting plan to offer free health care and college education, let’s take a look at what they’re offering. Voxdotcom's headline nails it:

"We've lost sight of how wildly irresponsible the Republican tax plans are"

Here's a brief look:

Marco Rubio has promised tax cuts amounting to $6.8 trillion, Cruz $8.6 trillion, and Trump a whopping $9.5 trillion, according to the Tax Policy Center (and that's not including interest on the debt they would rack up!).

By comparison, the budget disaster we saw coming a mile away with the Bush tax cuts...

The tax cuts George W. Bush proposed during the 2000 campaign were $1.32 trillion — which would be $1.82 trillion in today's dollars. And taxes were higher in 2000 than they are today, and the country was running surpluses rather than deficits.

The misleading dopiness of a Balanced Budget Amendment: What should be a no brainer for even the most conservative tightwad, is anything but, because it sounds good:

It gets worse. Rubio and Cruz both support a Balanced Budget Amendment, so they can't just add their tax cuts to the national debt. They also support spending more on the military — up to $1 trillion for Rubio, about $2.4 trillion for Cruz. 

For example; even though Rubio's chances are slim, he's still in the race and has the backing of Scott Walker. Here's his exciting simple plan:

Marco Rubio announced that he'll pay for his tax cuts by doing something truly big: ending funding for Medicaid and for the Children’s Health Insurance Program — which 71 million Americans, or 22 percent of the country, rely on for health care. Impressive, right? The problem is that only gets Rubio about $4.7 trillion.

Rubio could find another trillion dollars by eliminating all education spending — Pell grants, the Department of Education, K-12 funds, school nutrition programs, Head Start, all of it. That gets him to roughly $5.7 trillion. Knocking out all justice spending could net another $561 billion. But there might be some political resistance to wiping out the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, much of the Department of Justice, all United States attorneys, the entire federal judiciary, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

 And then to fulfill his balanced budget promise, he's got to get rid of the deficits that already exist and are projected to grow in the coming years.

Impossible? Yea. Cruz's out does Rubio's:

Cruz is proposing a full $8.6 trillion in tax cuts. To get there, he could start with everything on Rubio's list and then end all federal transportation funding. Goodbye, Coast Guard, Transportation Security Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal Highway Administration! And sorry, all you states relying on federal funds to build or rebuild your highways and ports! The problem is all that money only amounts to $935 billion. That gets Cruz to a cool $7.8 trillion, but his job isn't done yet.

The good news is that the $715 billion he could get from eliminating spending on veterans would pretty much close the gap. And who'll miss the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Veteran Benefits Administration, the Veterans Health Administration, or the National Cemetery Administration? Of course, there is one small problem Cruz has also promised to increase military spending by $2.4 trillion. And he's also got Rubio's balanced-budget problem.

Remember, they're doing this so Republicans won't have to raise taxes on the wealthy. And Trump's sketchy idea?

The projected US deficit for the next 10 years is $9.4 trillion. Passing Donald Trump’s $9.5 trillion tax cuts would more than double that total.

The federal government is expected to bring in about $21 trillion in individual income taxes over the next 10 years. Trump’s cuts amount to a 45 percent reduction from that projection … he's also promised to maintain funding for entitlements while increasing spending on the military. There's just no way to reconcile all that. Taken together, even the most sympathetic reading of Trump's plan dissolves into incoherence.

None of this even take into consideration spending on natural disasters that Republicans insist must be made up with cuts elsewhere.

GOP Budgets - "just as rough as the last time" - the result of badly written budgets, not spending.

Republicans have always had a foolproof budgeting plan that can't fail in the eyes of their low information voters: Got a budget shortfall again? It's not bad budgeting, they just have to cut spending again.

It's never due to bad decisions and supply side nonsense. Sen. Alberta Darling said exactly that when a reporter asked her what happens if revenues don't increase due to tax and spending cuts:

Darling: "...you have to further reduce the size and scope of government..."

They actually believe it's never their fault. After another bad budget with the usual predicted revenue shortfalls, clueless Republicans face another "rough" spot of their own making:

(Republican Sen. Scott) Fitzgerald told county officials he expects the next budget will be "just as rough as this past one."

Fitzgerald of course blamed the state's shortfall on a lagging national economy...Obama basically. Oddly, Minnesota has a $2 billion surplus, and no shortfall. We could blame Obama for that, right?

Also, if this were a real problem, then why aren't Republicans writing responsible budgets that account for that "lag" (because they can't budget). WPR audio:



While blaming Obama, Walker showed off his bad judgement by foolishly holding onto our fading manufacturing base. Two decades later, he's apparently still not heard that sucking sound...:

Wisconsin's large manufacturing sector is heavily influenced by national and global factors, Walker said. "But we’re still going to persevere..."

In response, as covered by Jakes TA Economic Funhouse, one of my favorite fighting Democratic legislators Gordon Hintze put out the following to the point press release. I hope we see more of this:

One final SUPPLY SIDE note: Below, I've collected a few other Republican supply side budgetary problems ignored by the press who are preoccupied with the GOP primary circus. Long story short, Republicans can't run a functioning government. It's a supply side death spiral nationwide, starting with Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback:

AP: Kansas collected $7 million less in taxes than expected in January, and a top aide to Republican Gov. Sam Brownback said that ongoing problems in key parts of the state's economy are to blame. Kansas tax collections have fallen short of expectations in 6 of the 7 months of this fiscal year … disappointing corporate income tax collections and lower-than-anticipated sales tax collections. Since the current fiscal year began in July, the state has collected$26 million less than anticipated, a shortfall of 0.8 percent … Kansas has struggled to balance its budget since the Republican-dominated Legislature slashed personal income taxes in 2012 and 2013 at Brownback's urging in an effort to stimulate the economy. GOP legislators last year increased sales and cigarette taxes to head off a deficit in the current budget. 

You've just gotta love this down-the-rabbit-hole response:

Brownback has argued that the income tax cuts have stimulated the economy to prevent larger shortfalls in tax collections

And in Oklahoma, where they sadly reelected another bad Republican supply side governor....

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin addressed the people of in her annual State of the State address saying her first priority is the state's estimated $1 billion budget shortfall … Governor Mary Fallin and Republican legislative leaders have said they intend to target "off-the-top" funding streams earmarked for things like transportation and public schools as part of an attempt to fill the roughly $1 billion budget hole. 

Now that Republicans are in control: Budget Deficit Increases after 6 years of Decline.....

I think this says it all about our big talking supply-siders...an actual paragraph from the CBO report:

Huffington Post: "The government will spend $544 billion more than it takes in this year -- a $105 billion increase in the deficit from 2015, according to the CBO. At the same time, federal spending will increase by more than 20 percent … the result of a 7 percent increase in mandatory spending, a 3 percent increase in discretionary dollars, and a 14 percent jump in interest payments on debt … including a tax extenders package attached to the omnibus appropriations bill." 

Ryan confused? Accuses Obama of...Trickle Down Economics?

Paul Ryan just admitted that trickle down economics is bad, which is honest and good.

I thought it was surreal enough when I heard Ryan whine on and on about wage stagnation, when he's done everything he can to make it worse. But now in a fevered moment of projection, he's blaming Obama for the GOP's radical trickle down agenda. Stunningly, he's saying trickle down is bad, and giving it Obama face:

It's "Trickle Down" Obama! 

A reporter asked Ryan if he believes the president “deserves any credit at all” for economic improvements. The Republican Speaker responded, “I think the Federal Reserve has done more. And by the way, I think the Federal Reserve has given us, in combination with Obama policies, more regulations, higher taxes, more uncertainty; has given us trickle-down economics.”

Sounds really bad...for Ryan and the Republicans. 

But this isn't the first time Ryan has tried to do the old "switcheroo," taking the worst of the Republican Party, and making seem really Democratic. Remember Obama's push for "crony capitalism?" I know, I missed that too:

President Barack Obama’s most recent tax overhaul for corporations is just “crony capitalism,” Rep. Paul Ryan says. “It’s a raw deal and I think it’s more crony capitalism. The president likes to pick winners and losers. He lets some businesses off the hook…”

Sorry, that didn't make any sense. Thomas Frank's wrote this about Ryan's pretzel logic:

Government, in Mr. Ryan's view, is alternately the tool and the terror of big business, doing one firm's bidding as it crushes another one. The solution is to get government out of the game altogether ... the tail-chasing logic behind the "down with big business" rhetoric. 

MSNBC's Steve Benen also noticed how Ryan now suddenly and conveniently appreciates the Federal Reserve:

What is important is that Ryan’s explanation is gibberish. Consider the Speaker’s argument broken down into its component parts:

1. Paul Ryan opposes the Fed’s recent monetary policies.2. Paul Ryan believes the Fed’s recent monetary policies are bad for the economy.3. Asked about positive economic developments, Paul Ryan credits the policies he doesn’t support.

About a year ago, Paul Krugman described Ryan’s understanding of monetary policy as “craziness.” The assessment continues to be fair.

Benen rightfully concludes...

Paul Ryan doesn’t get to complain about trickle-down economics; Paul Ryan is a champion of trickle-down economics.

Jeb Bush's Trickle Down Plan Forces Cuts to Safety Net Programs.

Republicans are back at it again, proposing massive tax cuts that will only result in massive revenue shortfalls.

Now it's Jeb Bush's turn to offer up another crisis creating trickle down budget.

That means cutting social safety net programs like Medicare, Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps, education, etc.. This is getting so old.

Economist Jared Bernstein wrote this about the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center analysis of Jeb Bush’s proposed tax cuts. The TPC’s findings:

First, the Bush plan lowers tax rates on both individuals and businesses, on both earnings and investment income. It repeals the estate tax, and shifts to a territorial system for multi-national corporations (meaning they don’t have to pay U.S. taxes on foreign earnings). 

TPC estimates that the plan would lose $6.8 trillion in the first decade relative to the current tax code, and $8.6 trillion in the next decade; that’s 2.6 and 2.3 percent of expected GDP over these years. 

And because this is another iteration of trickle down economics, the trillion dollar budget losses will be offset magically with cuts to discretionary spending, which really isn't discretionary at all.

Creating a Budget Crisis to Cut our Safety Nets: As the TPC pointed out:

If the deficit effect is as large as we estimate, government borrowing would push up interest rates and crowd out private investment, possibly offsetting some or all of the positive incentive effects. The campaign has said it intends to cut spending to offset any revenue loss from its tax cuts. Offsetting a deficit this large would require very large cuts in entitlement and discretionary spending.

Take a look at who benefits again in the chart. Big surprise? Still, conservative voters don't mind getting the tax cuts scraps. Behold the results of supply side economics:

Obama trashes Walker supply side jobs & business disaster, compares Minnesota's "Middle Class Economics."

If only Obama and the Democrat Party would talk like this all the time, in every media interview.

Obama makes it official, Walker is the best example yet of failed supply side economics, comparing him with "just across the river:"

Obama's Economy forcing 6,000 retailers to Close? Right wing off on another tangent.

My conservative friend really, really, really, really hates President Obama. I can’t imagine why.

So today he sent me the following ridiculous article about 6,000 stores closing nationwide, proving Obama economy sucks.

The stores listed aren't closing because of Obama, and many aren't closing because Americans don’t have enough discretionary money, although that’s true in general terms. Maybe the stores and the "times" have something to do with it?

My friend was quick to blame Obama, but what about all those austere governors and legislatures? Don't they have control of their own economic engines? And yet, they like to take credit for low unemployment and job creation. What about store closings?

Here’s the snarky “unbiased” way the article started:

You’ll never hear the Obama administration pass on an opportunity to gloat about the miracles they think they’ve managed to pull off over the past seven years to get America’s economy back on track. The only problem with that is, it’s not remotely true. If you want a real indication of how President Barack Obama’s economy is fairing, just look to a recent report that shows a coming “retail apocalypse,” with major retailers across the country planning on shutting the doors to thousands of stores due to a sharp decline in discretionary consumer spending.

And who’s against raising the minimum wage? Who’s destroying unions, passing right-to-work-for-less, repealing prevailing wage laws, and forcing people to work for nothing just to get food stamps? They don't get the consequences of their ideology.

And this conservative site is whining about “declining discretionary consumer spending.” Yikes.

Here’s where I’ll step in with the real reason the following stores are closing:

Some of the major retailers who plan on closing at least 10 stores over the next year or so include:

Radio Shack: Dated and no longer relevant today. I love the stores, I just don’t use them anymore, now that I gave up my cassette and reel to reel tape decks.

Office Depot/Office Max: They merged, and are closing stores all over because many stores are too close to each other.

Dollar Tree/Family Dollar: Expanded in a ridiculous way, especially during the years coming out of the recession. Still fun, but not as relevant anymore.

Walgreens: Expanded in a ridiculous way, threatened to move overseas, and internet orders for drugs is picking up.

Barnes & Noble: Seriously, with Kindle’s, e-books, and tablets, do you really have to ask.

Macy’s, Sears and JCPenney: Sears has been having trouble for years, and has improved. Macy’s and JCPenney are “Mall” stores, and we all know how malls are doing.

Speaking of malls, the article treats them like they’re still magical places to hang out.

Most malls around the country sport a Sears store along with a Macy’s or JCPenney and experts are advising not to be surprised to see the doors of many of those stores shuttered over the next year or so. “It’s getting ugly out there.”

Oh, and before ObamaCare, insurance rates were really low? 

So what else is the problem? For one, Americans are maxing out their credit cards far too early into the year and some of that can be blamed on higher health insurance costs (thanks, Obama) and rising taxes (thanks, Obama). (H/T WND).

Kansas' supply side disaster for K-12 warning to voters in 2016.

The $126 million cuts to K-12 continues the school funding slide in Wisconsin, with more to come if republicans have their way. But check out what happened in Kansas when the state cut $51 million a little over a month ago in March for the current school year (on top of their past cuts):

Kansas shows us what could happen if Republicans win in 2016: At least 8 Kansas school districts recently announced that they’re starting summer break early this year … It’s because these schools ran out of money, thanks to state leaders’ decision to ax education spending midyear to plug an ever-widening hole in their budget. Kansas politicians ... may also be doing the rest of the country a favor, by giving us a preview of what might happen if Republicans control the White House and Congress after the 2016 ­election.

Supply Side Infallibility…as long as you continue to cut taxes and public services:

The consequences in Kansas, after all, are a result of fulfilling the great Laffer Curve dream that has Republican presidential hopefuls such as Marco Rubio, Scott Walker and Chris Christie all salivating: dramatic tax cuts, concentrated among those at the top, coupled with the promise that such action will, through trickle-down voodoo, increase tax revenue and boost economic growth.

Unconstitutional, but Appeal gives way to more Educational cuts:

Kansas’s elected officals have a decades-long history of shortchanging students, and the state has been subjected to multiple lawsuits over whether its funding levels violated the state constitution’s requirements for adequate and equitable public education spending. The most recent major case was filed in 2010 before Brownback took office. The state’s Supreme Court found school funding levels indeed to be unconstitutional ... the state appealed the decision and has since cut funding further. 

The results conservatives seem quite happy with?

For districts, that has meant permanently closing a school here, expanding class sizes there, eliminating a math and science teacher here, maybe instituting pay-to-play athletics there. Teachers in the schools that are closing early are hustling to revamp their curricula so they can still cover all the material the state requires. Students are feeling the heat, too. 

Both Senate and House Republican balanced Budget proposals Increase Taxes on Families and Businesses, Despite the Denials.

Funny thing about Republicans, they're crazy deficit exploding tax cuts and increases have never gotten much notice before, until now. They're in charge of congress, so now the truth is coming out....

AP: FACT CHECK: Higher taxes to balance GOP budgets: The new House and Senate Republican budgets make a big boast: They both balance the federal budget within 10 years, without raising taxes. Their own numbers, however, say millions of American families and businesses would have to pay more in taxes to make the math work — about $900 billion more over the next decade.

Both budgets also claim big savings by repealing President Barack Obama's health law. But at the same time, they rely on more than $1 trillion in tax revenue from the health law that would supposedly be repealed.

So how do they explain keeping the ObamaCare tax revenue? Why they're going to...change...the tax code...yea, that's the ticket:

The House Republican budget repeals all of Obamacare — including the Obamacare tax hikes while calling for fundamental tax reform. A revamped tax code could raise just as much revenue as the system in place today, but without the harmful tax policies embedded in current law (like the Affordable Care Act)."