Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
Then why didn't he come out and say . . .Under my plan we would balance the budget, but to do it, exemptions would have to go away and the tax rate on people who make less than X amount would pay 10%. Since exemptions are gone, it would actually end up raising their taxes by about $2000.
|
You keep saying this, but the article you linked did not state that this is actually what would happen. It projected that one possible way to make the plan revenue neutral was to do away with all exemptions including those on the middle class who would be in the plan's 10% bracket. And the author says that "admittedly" that would be an "extreme scenario"--the implication being that the middle class exemptions would not be eliminated. Actually, Ryan said his proposed elimination of tax exemptions would be those that are typically used by those in the wealthier higher income brackets. Even Ryan knows that the "extreme scenario" of eliminating all middle class exemptions would not be politically feasible. Nor would his co-author of the plan, the very liberal Wyden, go for such an "extreme scenario."
The author of your article then projects a more realistic "scenario"--reducing federal spending. But he does not talk about the Ryan/Wyden plan's overall mechanics of reducing debt and costs and ulitimately making medicare solvent in the long run.
Threaded Mode