That's Jonathan Bernstein's simple, straightforward and indisputably accurate formula for Romney's "new" tax plan, which cruelly demonstrates the cretinous politics of unforgiving math. The formula is indeed accurate, but it doesn't add up.
Romney cannot leave the rich fiscally unmolested (0) while "remov[ing] the burden somewhat from middle income people"--thus [+(-X)]--as he promised at last week's debate, and then emerge on the other side with revenue neutrality--another (0). That is simply, straightforwardly, indisputably impossible.
The second zero must be a negative number. There's a common word for this: deficit. Yet Romney swears he'll thwart additional deficits at all costs--which means, inescapably, the erasure of his entire tax plan. So what Romney's proposing is this: nothing.
Unless of course he's sorta fibbing about his zero tolerance for new deficits and would in reality slash yet more government revenue to arrive, at some still nebulous date, at pseudoconservatism's ritualistic Holy Grail: the fatal garroting of the modern welfare state--all of it as we know it, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps ... all of it.
You and Berstein are letting Romney off easy.
Sooner or later, even GOP voters will realize that X about $8 trillion in reduced deductions and tax credits that will actually hit the higher incomes harder than the rest.
And that only gets you to NET ZERO for impact on the budget.
To balance the budget, another $10 trillion has to be out of expenditures. That's right, we are talking $18 trillion, not $5 trillion.
Remember, debt payments are off the table, as is defense because it is actually going to be increased. And Social Security and Medicare is off the table because they are paid with the payroll tax.
I think that leaves only the federal government's half of Medicaid and the rest of the budget. I believe "the rest of the budget" comprises 10-15% of the budget.
So let's assume that Romney really does have a plan to take out $5 trillion in deductions and credits. That leaves $13 trillion to pull out of Medicaid and "the rest of the budget".
Sorry, my inner engineer got the best of me.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | October 11, 2012 at 09:39 AM
It seems you and Robert are both out of touch with the exciting modern developments in Bistromathics and Quantum Economics. Have you never heard of Schrodinger's Deficit? It only exists or doesn't exist until open the ballot boxes.
Posted by: Peter G | October 11, 2012 at 10:12 AM
Who let the cat out?
Posted by: W Caulfield | October 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM
Please don't consider me a troll, but I think the way Romney's plan works (which he hasn't explained well) is that by increasing jobs and employment the revenues increase etc. etc. Whether this is sufficient to really ddecrease the deficit depends on a number of variables.
Posted by: Pablo | October 11, 2012 at 11:42 AM
@Pablo: You are correct and so is Romney. Economic growth back to "normal" will solve a significant portion of the deficit problem. He even asserts that his plan will create 12 million new jobs by the end of 2016. Of course, the consensus among economists is that the economy is already on track to create 12 million new jobs by the end of 2016. He really does not explaing how his plan will create 12 million new jobs except through the magic of Reaganomics (tax cuts and deregulation).
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | October 11, 2012 at 12:36 PM
@PeterG: Dang, and I was just getting over the Nobel Prize in physics being awarded for nullifying the Heisenberg Principle.
Nonetheless, I am man enough to admit that you and the GOP are right, and I am stuck in Old Europe arithmatic.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | October 11, 2012 at 12:38 PM