Krugman on the Romney Tax Plan

     First of all  I think Krugman is actually wrong when comparing his tax plan with President Obama's:

 1. Neither candidate is offering a realistic tax plan, because the fact is that the federal government is going to need more revenue than either is currently proposing. But the two men are not equivalent in their unrealism: Obama is proposing to raise revenue by around $80 billion a year compared with current policy, while Romney is proposing to cut revenue by around $450 billion a year compared with current policy. Obama is inadequate; Romney is intensely, screamingly irresponsible.

2. On top of that, Romney is scamming voters, claiming not only that he can make up the lost revenue by closing unspecified loopholes, but that he can do so in a way that doesn’t shift the tax burden away from the rich onto the middle class. He can’t, as a matter of sheer arithmetic — which is the point of that Tax Policy Center study.

3. The Romney campaign isn’t even trying to make a substantive argument in response — they’re just calling names.

        "Even if you approve of Romney’s policy thrust, you should be appalled by the cynicism and contempt for voters on display."

         http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/02/theses-on-taxes/

          I don't want to quibble but this is not quibbling. Obama's plan is not inadequate. What Krugman means is because it won't by itself cut the deficit. But who wants to do that in the middle of such a weak recovery?

          Krugman for the most part makes this same point. However, here he almost makes is sound as if balancing the budget in the short term should be a major focus. Paul, please be sure not to drink out of cups used by your co-worker, David Brooks, lest you catch something from him.

         The President's plan is not about cutting the deficit, it's about tax fairness and of beginning to end what Krugman talks about-the move that Romney wants to intensify in shifting the tax burden from the rich to the middle class.

          If there's ever a time to worry about cutting a deficit, now isn't it. If you had to, then you would want to look at the structural deficit. In fact, just recently Krugman wrote a piece that showed that most of the deficit can be linked to the recession. So what's going on here.

           Here Krugman really nails the crux of Romney's tax plan:

           "And the Romney people respond with deep voodoo, invoking the supposed fabulous growth effects from his tax cuts. And who could argue? Remember how the economy tanked after Clinton raised taxes? Remember how great things were after Bush cut them? Oh, wait."

           "More seriously, we have lots of empirical work on the effects of tax changes at the top — and none of it supports the Romney camp’s claims. What we’ve just learned is that they were faking it all along. There is no plan to offset the tax cuts; Romney is just intending to blow up the deficit to lavish favors on the wealthy, then use it as an excuse to savage Social Security and Medicare."

          http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/dooh-nibor/

          That in a nutshell is what the Ryan Budget  Romney tax plan amounts to.