7
| 112 views | www.nytimes.com
So if we add up Mr. Ryan’s specific proposals, we have $4.3 trillion in tax cuts, partially offset by around $1.7 trillion in spending cuts — with the tax cuts, surprise, disproportionately benefiting the top 1 percent, while the spending cuts would primarily come at the expense of low-income families. Over all, the effect would be to increase the deficit by around two and a half trillion dollars.
[/quote]
How very Chernishevkyist...
How very Chernishevkyist...
How very Chernishevkyist...
[/quote]
lol, funny.
I been reading 'what is to be done' again, both of them.
How very Chernishevkyist...
lol, funny.
I been reading 'what is to be done' again, both of them.
[/quote]
I think the point he's making is quite straightforward. How can you take a guy seriously who claims to be all about deficit reduction, when his plan would increase the deficit by trillions?
I think the point he's making is quite straightforward. How can you take a guy seriously who claims to be all about deficit reduction, when his plan would increase the deficit by trillions?
In other words, he generally opposes tax-cuts that can be renewed, because they are never temporary. He usually pushes for self-regulated stabilizers such as unemployment benefits and income insurance.
In other words, he generally opposes tax-cuts that can be renewed, because they are never temporary. He usually pushes for self-regulated stabilizers such as unemployment benefits and income insurance.