WWL>Topics>>1-7 12:35pm Garland talks to Pat Garofalo about the fiscal cliff

1-7 12:35pm Garland talks to Pat Garofalo about the fiscal cliff

Jan 7, 2013|

Garland talks to Pat Garofalo, Economic Policy Editor for ThinkProgress.org, about the fiscal cliff bill

Related Audio:

  1. Think Tank 1210pm drug addiction in the city


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    Should drug addiction in the city be treated as a health issue or drug issue? More deaths due to overdose in New Orleans than homicide. This hours guest: Dr. Jeffery Rouse - Orleans Parish Coronor

  2. Think Tank 1110am healthcare plan


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    Bernie Sanders said he’s going to push his plan for a single-payer healthcare plan like Europe.  He says Obamacare is costing us too much and the GOP can’t get their bill together to correct the problems. This hours guest: Michael Cannon - Director of Health Policy @ Cato Institute

  3. Think Tank 1010am recreational marijuana


    Tue, 28 Mar 2017

    OH CANADA!  Could Canada be the next country to legalize recreational marijuana? Canada is proposing legislation that would legalize recreational marijuana by 2018.  This hours guest: Chief Larry Kirk - Retired Chief ( Old Monroe Police Department, Missouri & member of LEAP (Law Enforcement Action Partnership)

  4. Think Tank 1210pm select committee


    Mon, 27 Mar 2017

    Is an independent “select committee” necessary in the investigation of Russian hacking & possible collusion with Trump associates? This hours guest: Max Bergmann - Senior Fellow at Center for American Progress Steve Bucci - Director of the Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies at the Heritage Foundation


Automatically Generated Transcript (may not be 100% accurate)

Well we think about the aftermath of your fiscal cliff. Talking to. -- -- -- It is senator George Washington University would cut your -- where this economic policy others are important progress room presume in the liberal son of the political spectrum welcome back to show and happy you're here. I have been mediating those to be here. Always good to have you would come I'm looking at a number of reports. Britain over the DR Holland and his. David Brooks is one album. And New York Times -- but what computer you're called -- Squishy. Conservative. Because he goes along with the liberals -- a regular basis. Ready made a couple of statements in his report that more urgency in these if you think these -- true. He. References converts from budget office injured premarket. And he says by twenty truly talk. Entitlement spending debt payments or projected to suck up all federal revenues. Present and correct. I have to look at the exact report and more exactly there assuming but it doesn't. Sound totally creepy in the protection that -- -- a little further out but it is true that. I can mean literally nothing changes for the next several decades eventually get to a point where every dollar in federal revenue would go toward. Either entitlement or interest payments and. Okay and for forgot to set this up with the obvious question you or. Summary of what happened with the fiscal debate and be results. I think it's -- kind of quickly deal we're going to the accident squishy liberal I think this is a great deal. In that they didn't really important and today extended unemployment benefits further long term unemployed which is really key those people we're gonna get the rug pulled right out from under them. Today extended some really important tax credits including the child tax credit and the earned income tax credit those help -- middle class and low income people quite a bit those are really important. Dale locked in package rates -- not exactly where I would have locked them in but they are now at least block and we're not going to be playing a goofy game every year and a half. Those were all important. At the end of the day I think that the deal didn't really. I've accomplished a lot and what it did at those important things -- did accomplish are going to be offset by some of the damage caused particularly the. Patent expiration of the payroll tax cut which is going to be a big being on the economy this year. Okay this is according to the International Monetary Fund their most real important. The American long term obligations were required or an immediate improvement 35% increase in all taxes. 35% cut in all benefits your thoughts. Yeah doing that would be totally creepy the best interest in the according International Monetary Fund because last week. IMF lead economist actually came out and dead. All the -- huge tax hikes and spending reduction packages that we has been. Promoting for the last. Who knows how many years. We actually underestimated how devastating has beaten the economy and higher order by a magnitude -- -- that they were actually three times -- detriment to the economy of the IMF had been saying their work. I'm doing those sorts of big dramatic changes attack quickly and just terrible for the economy that was kind of try to concerted action if not into a depression. And the reason most of deficit reduction plans to pardon -- for American progress -- included basically everybody. Are phased in very slowly over a very long period of time than. -- because to do that overnight it got so much money out of the economy and basically between Monday and Tuesday that you find yourself in terrorist action for no reason. Or warrant Lincecum quick break won't come backwards pat Garofalo -- economic policy you have to bring progress dot -- We're looking at the aftermath of the debate over fiscal cliff trying to figure out what's coming up and are there any temperatures out. And those you can -- kids download business and it's so is -- would stop doing that. Part of for a bigger deal of fiscal cliff aftermath we have. Pat Garofalo and with this economic policy and to bring congress dog or. Apparently you. Go over a couple of well let's go back to the International Monetary Fund. Oh. Wouldn't wouldn't when their reports are required immediate permanent. 35%. Increase and all taxes 35%. -- -- benefit. He reported that as ridiculous as you do with that pass swoop would be driven -- -- -- Do you see anything long term where benefits get cut. And that's an interesting question I think that's the ten million dollar question. It'd be certain that the programs. And entitlement programs the way they are currently structured and -- increase in function in a long term we're talking about before eventually they follow the whole budget. They're a lot is being however you can do it Q altered and that aren't necessarily. Benefit cuts and there are lots of ways to fix the program there -- a lot program than there are lots of options and a pickup they're just one of them. So it certainly not and giving that benefits to be cut in order to make them sustainable. -- here's the other thing -- from New York urban institute. Average Medicare couple prayers a 109000. Dollars in the program where over the lifespan. Gets out 343000. Dollars in benefits. Corning my mouth if they're true going to be 234000. Dollars and three money or those numbers incorrect. We don't know that particular number and I haven't seen that particular study I certainly a possibility but I don't want to pay -- try to -- without having actually look this particular study and what assumptions they are making. I think it gets kind of think he did think about these programs in terms of I painted them and I should get infected amount -- the back -- -- way these programs are designed is that we as a society have decided that. Providing health care to an elderly. Residents of something that we want to do and that we shouldn't pay for them whatever it takes to do that. And I think it helps to think about these programs in that way we raise taxes that we pay them out in order to support the things that we think are important. And that if he tried it too much into paid X amount and I should get excellent -- mapped out -- inevitably going to look an equitable and it's really not. The bad. To me sounds buried. Feasible very understandable. But here's streeters were run into my lack of understanding. We'll look at the fiscal -- progress -- results at least so far. And tell me -- -- government figures thrown. There were raised about 600 billion dollars in revenues over ten years. With the current projections not not escalating third reported that your current tenure projections. Will add eight trillion in new debt. You're right we should be you a country that doesn't look at the also felt we should provide funding would courts we should look at the -- we should. Try to container where it's feasible but it's those figures a 100000 verses three and through 2000 anywhere close. The question I have is where do we get the money. Iowa I mean that -- I think that the problem do you think it is trying to think he's a typical Clinton deal at the be all end all of. The deficit and debt reduction. It was a bad fixed for -- and self induced crisis that congress put up this can be confident. You can keep confident failed it created the fiscal cliff and so congress and created equally goofy thing to get rid of the goofy thing it created. So. You have to look much more long term we have the annual appropriations processes that in congress can fix the budget. We'll certainly be revisiting the tax debate even though congressional Republicans at the moment don't want to -- -- reform is something that a lot of the Newton partied on both right and left I think is something that needs to be done and that you can actually raise the money list. There are lots of ways to do it I think kinda look at the fiscal cliff that they actually do anything other than the. Congress's own health and used to -- right then I'm not make creating. Aren't there conservative represented who I have a rug before you. -- say okay here's what we got to understand it correctly observed the liberals say absolutely and I cutting benefits or room and talk about it conservatives say. Absolutely not we're not adding more taxes during morning talk about it. And I said to him what would you bring you will you do keynesian theory. Look. We blueprint more money were put more money in their in the carburetor you -- your. You're you're putting more fuel in the engine once he gets up and running. Then we can stop. The printing of money and and we continue on with the very healthy. Economy and we have the death but we can manage a debt -- that gets reduced by the expansion of the economy. And he said we would agree with that. If the -- -- Evers said one change said himself. And that is once it's expand. And a certain GDP or whatever that measurement comes. This -- cut back to what government was booked full. Do you think that would or would it ever be agreed to by the liberal side of the economy. I think I think here a year framing is exactly right I think if you look back at the interpreter for -- to we have independent economic performance looked at post war era. And that's basically what happened in the -- Carolina complicating factors and that but. And the British conservatives agreed to that would there be a corresponding agreement. That wouldn't you reached -- certain metric that we've put government back to the size. It was before. These. It depends on what you mean by a -- because a complicating factor here within this frame that you have which I think is right. Complicating factor is the demographics. We are getting much older as a country we're going to get much older over the next several decades. So this claim no amount of Medicare dollars are gonna pay for far less for Medicare the thing about Social Security dollars in the paper -- Social Security so. Because we. And and that is true that if that's -- that budget if they get away -- not Ari if that's true out of these young people. The bear the burden of -- -- generation. How did leave. You have -- Other lots of ways I did to raise revenue that doesn't necessarily mean Paula Deen and young people over their head. And we just need Q I think then it. It into a frame of mind certain you know we're talking about meeting right now for instance over an -- -- about 1415%. Of GDP in revenue that's gonna go back up to -- out. Eighteen under healthy economy. When President Clinton balanced the budget it was about that a little over 20% of GDP in revenue. I think we didn't start thinking about that was where we were the last time that and I think has slipped -- believe technical. And that we need to be okay Witten getting it up back there and that's acknowledging that we happen. Holders society we've made these decisions -- -- support the elderly which I think the right on and say you need to act accordingly in order to pay for them. Always a pleasure to have you on the show you have great dude you're appreciated the top. And there's a -- a little -- policy editor of -- progress. And it's. Your attitude to leave -- it is it's very personally. Have we heard boats off. And and I think you can learn from. I'm -- high school education for us to not shout down either side but I understand it. I think -- ever clearer understanding. There -- nor understand. Between the two. And you tell me what do you do about it I think I know Debra do now. The reback in the old Varitek I think we middle little broad -- at least. Understanding each side when it comes severe economic for a similar congresses and our country as soon. And that's what would try to do the think tank. Hope you'll join this Morris on his next this is. Number rubio Bill -- every area tomorrow on three -- -- that.