The adult in the room designed a bill to be fiscally responsible and the CBO confirm it will reduce the deficit. I understand that's a hard pill to swallow for McCarthy and the right who support fiscally irresponsible bills. This good news is hard for these people.
Can you not read what was just shown to you? Yes it is paid for. Unless you make over 400k you will not pay for the bill and the deficit will not increase. It’ll actually decrease. That’s how many things can be funded by taxing the wealthiest Americans just a fraction. And this actually doesn’t even roll back all of Trumps tax cut. So in the end, it would be worse for the rich if the Dems just reversed the Trump tax cut. Its actually a pretty big win and a smart bill. Unless you hate investing into the middle class and creating jobs.
can't vouch for any of this, just passing it along as it is paywalled for most folks here https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-re...gress-democrats-11637275848?mod=hp_opin_pos_1 The Real Biden Bill: At Least $4.6 Trillion Program by program, here’s how Democrats disguise the real cost of their entitlement blowout. By The Editorial Board Updated Nov. 18, 2021 9:50 pm ET The Congressional Budget Office on Thursday released its “official” cost estimates for the House tax and entitlement bill, but don’t believe it. The CBO gnomes aren’t lying about a 10-year deficit estimate of $367 billion. They’re obliged to score the bill under rules that Democrats have rigged with multiple tricks that disguise the real cost by trillions of dollars. Democrats phase out the biggest programs in the bill while paying for them with 10 years of tax increases. They phase-in other programs and off-load costs to the states. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates the House bill would cost nearly $4.6 trillion over 10 years if temporary provisions are made permanent, as most will be. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) pegs the cost at $4.9 trillion if temporary tax credits and programs are made permanent through 2031. This would add $1.5 trillion to deficits over the next five years without additional tax offsets. Let’s take a tour of this budget deception. *** • Enhanced child allowances ($3,600 for children under age 6 and $3,000 up to age 17). This is the bill’s most expensive provision at about $130 billion a year, which is why Democrats limit it to one year. Does anyone doubt they’ll extend it in the future? They may get help from Republicans, who won’t want to be attacked for raising taxes on families. CRFB says making the allowances permanent would cost $1.13 trillion. Based on current law, it would cost $1.5 trillion since the $2,000 tax credit from the 2017 GOP tax reform is set to drop back to $1,000 after 2025. So that’s nearly $1.4 trillion in hidden costs alone. • Earned income tax credit expansion. The bill nearly triples the maximum EITC value for childless adults—but only for one year. Its $15 billion annual cost would be $135 billion if extended over the decade. The kicker: Individuals can qualify based on their previous year’s earnings, so they technically don’t have to work to get it. • ObamaCare premium subsidies. Democrats in March extended eligibility to Americans making more than 400% of the poverty line and capped their premium payments for benchmark plans at 8.5% of income. Subsidies for lower earners were also increased so people making 150% of the poverty line don’t have to pay a penny toward their premiums, compared to 4.1% before the change. These sweetened subsidies are set to expire after next year, but the bill extends them through 2025 while also allowing lower-income adults in states that opted out of the ObamaCare Medicaid expansion to qualify. CRFB says these subsidies will cost $530 billion if they are made permanent. • A new child-care entitlement. Households making up to 250% of their state’s median income would qualify for child-care vouchers, and their payments would be capped at 7% of income—less for lower earners. The bill appropriates about $100 billion through 2024 to states and “such sums as may be necessary” from 2025 to 2027. Spending on this entitlement like all others can be expected to increase on autopilot, especially as providers raise prices to capture more subsidies. States will have to pick up 5% of the cost from 2025 to 2027, which somewhat reduces federal spending but could lead to state tax hikes down the road. • Universal pre-K. The bill appropriates about $18 billion to states for universal pre-K through 2024 and then “such sums as may be necessary” through 2027. States would be on the hook for about 5% of the cost starting in 2025 and 37% in 2027. The pre-K and child care entitlements are estimated to cost only $380 billion because they phase in gradually and expire after six years. But there’s zero chance they will expire in 2027. Once the middle-class gets hooked, the entitlements will be impossible to repeal. CRFB estimates the two programs would cost $800 billion if made permanent. • The current $10,000 limit on the state-and-local tax (SALT) deduction increases to $80,000 through 2030. In 2031 it would return to $10,000. Penn Wharton says this gimmick would lead to $65 billion in additional tax revenue through 2031 though it would cost about $300 billion through 2025. Confused? Under current law, the $10,000 SALT cap is set to expire in 2025 with most of the 2017 GOP tax cuts. So raising the cap to $80,000 would add to the deficit through 2025 but subtract from it through 2031. This gimmick will make it harder to extend the other expiring provisions of the 2017 tax reform, such as bonus depreciation for business. CRFB says that if the 2017 tax reforms are extended separately, any savings on paper would be erased and replaced with an additional $340 billion in costs. *** In sum, the House bill will cost $2 trillion to $3 trillion more than CBO is estimating because Democrats have camouflaged the costs. Penn Wharton estimates the bill’s tax increases and other revenue will yield about $1.8 trillion, but this doesn’t account for how the tax hikes will change the incentives to work and invest. Keep in mind that CBO this summer projected that annual deficits will already exceed $1 trillion on average through 2030, causing U.S. debt to swell by $12.8 trillion—and that’s before the infrastructure bill or this House bill. When the spending all kicks in, and the rich are all taxed out, the middle class will be hit with a huge tax increase. This is the most dishonest spending bill in American history. Appeared in the November 19, 2021, print edition.
The glaring problem with that analysis is that it overlooks potential economic gains from many of the features of the bill. Things like child care allowances and the EIC can will be spent back in the economy to pay for things like childcare. Also providing more childcare will free up more parents to enter the workforce.
Wise choice to not vouch for any of it . Not sure why anyone would trust the partisan WSJ editorial board over the non-partisan CBO. My understanding is the CBO has been fairly accurate in their projection. p.s I read quickly through it... my quick reaction to it:
Math. When you factor in gains from taxes it offsets the deficits and some. It’s not that hard to see the value to the economy with the small risk. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/18/build-back-better-act-vote-cbo-releases-score-of-biden-plan.html
I am still skeptical especially after reading Os' post above. Why would so many programs end after just one year? Seems like an easy way to skew the numbers. I.D.I.O.T.
I’m legitimately asking - isn’t the answer that if/when legislation is proposed to extend programs, those extensions will have to be funded with new proposed sources of revenue, and receive its own CBO analysis? Namely, each iteration needs to stand on its own? and if that’s true, isn’t it a bit of a wacko straw man to attack the pending bill for what may or may not happen in the future? Do we even know that the Dems will control Congress after midterms? Seems to me everyone thinks that’s an open question.
Its a lot more than just cars and gas .... Try the grocery store - Its outa control. Home prices - Thru the roof. Healthcare costs - Holy cow. I really can't think of anything that hasn't been affected ... regardless of who you try to blame.
this warrants repeating WSJ's intellectual dishonest analysis conveniently assumes that the programs have no economic impact take the child care perspective, as a result of this bill, there will be more child care workers working, withholding tax on their pay goes back to the US Treasury. WSJ conveniently ignores this economic impact and tax withholding on these parents' paycheck goes back to the US Treasury. WSJ conveniently ignores this economic impact
So the problem with the bill is that it doesn't blow up the deficit? Some of the programs end because it's being fiscally responsible. In the future, I'm sure the fight will start over again on how to extend those provisions with offsetting revenue. Contrast this with the Trump bill that doesn't give a damn about the deficit. As I said, the people that voted for the Trump's finically irresponsible bill that is ballooning the deficit to new records are not happy that this is a fiscally responsible bill.
I assume that's just because the bill is passed through budget reconciliation. Every year the budget will be reconciled and rescored. The CBO clearly states though that their figures are based on a decade. Not one year. I don't know why that's confusing to you. Do you just think the CBO is lying? Also you do realize that the Bill has to go through the Senate and Joe Manchin right? It's likely to get another round of cuts to make sure it doesn't add to the deficit, and then go back to the House. I'm not sure why there's much reason to freak out at the moment. The issues with inflation now are due to the fact that we do not manufacture anything here anymore so we are relying on imports which are jammed up at ports across the world. Saudi Arabia, Russia, Qatar, and the big oil companies control the cost of oil which is making gas prices go up which makes the cost of transporting goods go up which raises costs. Those are real but separate issues that have nothing to do with our national debt. If we want to grow our economy we need to make investments in order to compete, and start making some sh$t here to create wealth. BBB might scare you because there are social programs in there, and you are a "pull yourself up from your bootstraps" kind of guy, but the fact is, only one party is intent on making investments in order to grow the economy. Reaganomics and trickle down economics from tax cuts at the top can't be the only answer. That obviously never balanced the budget either, but growing the economy during FDR by making investments sure as hell did, and got us out of massive depression as well. (bit of a rant there. sorry)
mccarthy's all night fillibuster simply managed to get the bill passed during the day instead of with a late night vote. President Biden says thanks kev! The House Just Passed Biden’s Build Back Better Bill. Here’s What’s In It https://time.com/6121415/build-back-better-spending-bill-summary/
See this is exactly what a "filibuster" is intended to do. Before a bill goes for a vote, the minority party is able to speak for a day or two which yes does delay a vote, but at the same time allows Americans and those in Congress teetering to hear a compelling message. If your message is compelling, you can move people... if it a diatribe of nonsense, you just shoot yourself in the foot. THAT is what a filibuster is supposed to be. McCarthy robbed his party of the chance to say "passed in the den of night so nobody sees all that socialism"