In this weeks Businessweek there is a short interview that Tom Keene Had with former Reagan OMB Director David Stockman. There is really nothing knew in it; he advocates means testing and outright stripping of benefits for the rich. It's just that it hit me; how is treating Social Security like the large part of the budget it is (and not the so called trust fund it is perceived to be) and eliminating its payouts to high earners not a political win for both sides? It would preserve the benefits for those that need it while "taxing" the rich (both Dem talking points). While at the same time it "reigns in entitlement spending" for Conservatives. Throw in slightly lower taxes for the rich (not as much as this change would save) or an increase in the retirement age by a year and I don't see how this could not look good for both sides.
It's the creative ideas and true compromises that will win the day. This isn't a benefits cut that Democrats would hate (you could sell it as a revenue creator) and this isn't a tax increase (hell you could sell it as a spending cut paired with a tax cut if you were so inclined). I really hope this is something the super committee takes a look at.
It's the creative ideas and true compromises that will win the day. This isn't a benefits cut that Democrats would hate (you could sell it as a revenue creator) and this isn't a tax increase (hell you could sell it as a spending cut paired with a tax cut if you were so inclined). I really hope this is something the super committee takes a look at.
No comments:
Post a Comment