06-21-2016, 11:06 AM
First, start with the grand bargain that federal spending will be increased while federal taxes will be cut, dollar for dollar, until inflation reaches a "level of concern." Currently, the FED see inflation at a necessary minimum of 2% for a healthy, growing economy; other economists make a strong argument for 3-3.5% minimum . Let's set the level at 3% where, if breeched, federal spending would decrease and federal taxes would increase, dollar for dollar, until inflation subsides below 3% again.
Once technocrats at the FED set the annual spending/taxing levels based on the 3% inflation target, then Congress can fight over the specific increases and cuts (Note - without this duty, there would otherwise be little need for Congress and absolutely no need for the GOP). That brings us to your proposal -
Your proposal is extremely non-progressive. One can perhaps make some argument against a $15 or even a $12/hr minimum but the lose of any minimum wage in our current economic environment would be devastating to the working poor; taking another 25% back without exception would be a lot of salt into the wound. Your $12.5K rebate would fall far short of making up for that.
Much better would be to cut all payroll taxes with assurances that all entitlements will be fully paid unless at the time of payment, inflation exceeds the 3% threshold. Then said benefits would be proportionally cut along with all other government spending, and taxes would be raised, dollar for dollar. Once inflation returns to below the 3%, then these spending cuts and tax increases would be phased out.
Since spending would have to be increased, dollar for dollar, for the payroll tax cuts, I would use the billions to eliminate student loans and provide public college education for free. I might put a sour-puss Austrian in charge of controlling college inflation.
Money should also pour into infrastructure and R&D with a particularly focus on the buildout of the driverless e-car network and grid.
Under the economic boom this would entail, I don't think you would need either an income guarantee or job guarantee program, but I'd be open to the argument depending on the data.
The beauty of this approach is it actually puts the inflationisties in charge! They'll focus on analysis of why 3% and not 0% or on government data, but people will give even less of a shXt than they do with their current whining. Another silver lining is that without all the gold bug ads, Faux News and right wing nut radio will likely go bankrupt.
Once technocrats at the FED set the annual spending/taxing levels based on the 3% inflation target, then Congress can fight over the specific increases and cuts (Note - without this duty, there would otherwise be little need for Congress and absolutely no need for the GOP). That brings us to your proposal -
Your proposal is extremely non-progressive. One can perhaps make some argument against a $15 or even a $12/hr minimum but the lose of any minimum wage in our current economic environment would be devastating to the working poor; taking another 25% back without exception would be a lot of salt into the wound. Your $12.5K rebate would fall far short of making up for that.
Much better would be to cut all payroll taxes with assurances that all entitlements will be fully paid unless at the time of payment, inflation exceeds the 3% threshold. Then said benefits would be proportionally cut along with all other government spending, and taxes would be raised, dollar for dollar. Once inflation returns to below the 3%, then these spending cuts and tax increases would be phased out.
Since spending would have to be increased, dollar for dollar, for the payroll tax cuts, I would use the billions to eliminate student loans and provide public college education for free. I might put a sour-puss Austrian in charge of controlling college inflation.
Money should also pour into infrastructure and R&D with a particularly focus on the buildout of the driverless e-car network and grid.
Under the economic boom this would entail, I don't think you would need either an income guarantee or job guarantee program, but I'd be open to the argument depending on the data.
The beauty of this approach is it actually puts the inflationisties in charge! They'll focus on analysis of why 3% and not 0% or on government data, but people will give even less of a shXt than they do with their current whining. Another silver lining is that without all the gold bug ads, Faux News and right wing nut radio will likely go bankrupt.