The steps necessary to fix the federal budget are actually pretty obvious: let the “Bush tax cuts” expire, as presumably any good Keynesian would tell you is the right thing to do, means test Medicare, raise the Social Security retirement age, cut federal employees’ compensation, and reduce our overseas military commitments.
Running on that platform and winning is the hard part.
You really think that is enough? Don’t get me wrong, definitely the right direction. I think addressing the rise in health care costs is also crucial since it would also help Medicare (and means testing Medicare would likely help with the cost increases as well).
And yeah, such a platform can be called the Party Pooper Platform, that and it undermines the American exceptionalism view that so many on the Right and the Left have.
Means testing Medicare might not reduce healthcare costs but, since that’s where much of the problem with the federal budget is, it would go a long way to rationalize the budget. Reductively, it would definitely do so.
Go take a look at the famous projections graph over at the CBO. Reducing Medicare spending (which means testing can do) goes a long way to eliminating the non-sustainable part. Reducing federal employees’ compensation (namely the employer component of their healthcare plans) would increase the pressure.
It would cause major problems for the states, though. Resolving the states’ fiscal problems is a different subject.
Even setting aside budget issues Medicare should be means-tested. I don’t mind docking Verdon’s pay to help poor people get medical care, but it seems a bit much to squeeze him for the benefit of rich retirees.
How about a wealth tax too? :p
I think we need a tax on intellectual property income. After all, those people continue to get income long after the “work” is finished. What do you think Michael? 😉
Actually we don’t get paid to work. We create a product and then sell it. While we’re working we generally get paid nothing. And that’s all most writers ever make.
Now, if you wanted to guarantee that all writers earn a minimum living wage that would be a great boon to most writers. Not sure who would pay for that . . . maybe a tax on the entire class of consumers of intellectual property?
An IP consumption tax based on overall income. Yeah. That would put an end to the problem of IP piracy and guarantee we had a large corps of writers, artists and so on. Then we could bring back Socialist Realism. Lots of paintings and movies and books about heroic workers resisting the capitalist running dogs. No more Lady Gaga — Comrade Gaga.
Yes, many writers don’t get paid while working, nevertheless if successful said work will generate a stream of income, potentially, for decades. Think about all the money Disney generates of of its intellectual property (and why they wanted to extend protections for said intellectual property). This right here is where you see the very worst of intellectual property laws, the inherent rent seeking that accompanies it.
I do think Disney — and they are the 800 pound gorillas on this — have pushed it beyond the bounds of reason. I’ve said before that I’m open to some more reasonable law.
Limit control to say, 25 years, but with a licensing fee for a period of 50 years. It’s less about control of my work than it is about earning from my work. And I worry a lot less about civilians exploiting my work than I am about big players like, well, Disney.
Google “Animorphs fan fiction” and you get about 80,000 hits. We’ve never tried to interfere with regular people using our stuff.
Needless to say, Disney doesn’t take advice from me.
When you look at the CBO data, the problem lies mostly with Medicare and Medicaid. While I agree with the other parts you suggest, that is where you need your emphasis. While you are at it, you should note, as you have before, that costs are also growing for health care in the private sector at a faster than inflation rate. We need to work to bring down the actual cost of medical care in general. Our system is designed to maximize profits, not hold down costs. (Actually, there are way too many reasons why our costs are so high. Not a single issue problem.)
Steve
I don’t think you can ignore the other parts steve because then the problem becomes intractable. Asking one demographic group to suffer almost all the pain isn’t going to work. Hell asking all demographic groups to suffer probably wont work, but I’d say it has more chance of working than saying, “Hey, lets screw over that one demographic that consistently shows up to the voting booth.”