<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Tax Policy Forum &#187; daniel</title>
	<atom:link href="http://taxpolicyforum.com/author/daniel/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com</link>
	<description>Just another Politicalbear.com weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:42:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Fuel for the Financial Fire by John Taylor</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/fuel-for-the-financial-fire-by-john-taylor/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/fuel-for-the-financial-fire-by-john-taylor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 17:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=196</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Stanford professor John Taylor has an article in Forbes, which puts much of the blame for the current economic recession on the federal government and not with Wall Street.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stanford professor John Taylor has an article in <a href="http://www.stanford.edu/~johntayl/2009_pdfs/Fuel-for-Financial-Fire_Forbes-Nov-2-2009.pdf">Forbes</a>, which puts much of the blame for the current economic recession on the federal government and not with Wall Street.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/fuel-for-the-financial-fire-by-john-taylor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>American&#8217;s Underestimate Retirement Needs&#8211;An Interview with Wells Fargo VP Lynn Ford</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/americans-underestimate-retirement-needs-an-interview-with-wells-fargo-vp-lynn-ford/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/americans-underestimate-retirement-needs-an-interview-with-wells-fargo-vp-lynn-ford/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 16:07:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Fox Business Channel has an interview with Wells Fargo vice president Lynn Ford, who talked about American&#8217;s lack of understanding regarding retirement needs.  Watch the interview.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Fox Business Channel has an interview with Wells Fargo vice president Lynn Ford, who talked about American&#8217;s lack of understanding regarding retirement needs. <a href="http://video.foxbusiness.com/"> Watch the interview</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/11/05/americans-underestimate-retirement-needs-an-interview-with-wells-fargo-vp-lynn-ford/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Economy Grew 3.5% in Third Quarter</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/29/the-economy-grew-3-5-in-third-quarter/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/29/the-economy-grew-3-5-in-third-quarter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:18:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=186</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported the economy grew 3.5 percent in the third quarter of 2009.  This is certainly good news as it is the first increase in quarterly Gross Domestic Product (GDP) since the second quarter of 2008 and the largest since the third quarter of 2007. Yet if you delve into the numbers [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href="http://bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm">Bureau of Economic Analysis</a> reported the economy grew 3.5 percent in the third quarter of 2009.  This is certainly good news as it is the first increase in quarterly Gross Domestic Product (GDP) since the second quarter of 2008 and the largest since the third quarter of 2007.</p>
<p>Yet if you delve into the numbers one should be cautious of too much optimism.  The component which had the largest impact on the growth of GDP was personal consumption expenditures (PCE), specifically that of motor vehicles.  This was the result of the government program &#8220;Cash for Clunkers&#8221;, which enticed car buyers to trade in their old vehicles for a new fuel-efficient one&#8212;with the help of a federal government subsidy. </p>
<p>One other component which had an impact on the growth of GDP was changes in inventories.  For the past couple of years inventories have fallen as firms, which faced falling demand for their goods, chose not to replenish their shelves and warehouses.  Face with limited goods, firms began to replenish their inventories for the upcoming Christmas season. </p>
<p>I am sure President Obama&#8217;s economic advisers will be out in force telling everyone this is evidence that the president&#8217;s economic policies are working.  They should be cautious.  One quarter&#8217;s growth in GDP does not make a recovery.  <a href="http://www.autoobserver.com/2009/09/september-on-track-to-be-years-lowest-for-car-sales.html">Auto sales have fallen significantly</a> since the end of the &#8220;Cash of Clunkers&#8221; program in late August.  As well, if holiday sales are stagnant, businesses will be reluctant to continue to restock their shelves.  Unless consumers pick up their purchases of non-automobiles in the final three months of 2009, the U.S. economy will not see such robust growth in the fourth quarter.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/29/the-economy-grew-3-5-in-third-quarter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Retirees Will Receive a Cost-of-Living Adjustment</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/retirees-will-receive-a-cost-of-living-adjustment/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/retirees-will-receive-a-cost-of-living-adjustment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 20:56:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=182</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The big news in Washington yesterday was the announcement that retirees would not receive a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) for 2010.  The reason was the drop in the Consumer Price Index over the past twelve months.  Because 2010 is an election year, President Obama and some Democrats in Congress propose sending each Social Security recipient a check [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The big <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/10/14/AR2009101403954.html">news</a> in Washington yesterday was the announcement that retirees would not receive a cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) for 2010.  The reason was the drop in the Consumer Price Index over the past twelve months. </p>
<p>Because 2010 is an election year, President Obama and some Democrats in Congress propose sending each Social Security recipient a check for $250 to make up for the lack of COLA.  This will cost the federal government an additional $13 billion.  Rest assured, the president said the money would not come out of the Social Security &#8220;Trust Fund.&#8221;</p>
<p>In reality, retirees will receive a raise in their monthly benefit checks.  Because of the drop in overall prices and the fact the federal government will not reduce any retiree&#8217;s monthly Social Security check, each recipient will be able to purchase more goods and services next year.  In other words, the real value of their monthly payments increased due to the drop in prices.</p>
<p>Secondly, not to burst anyone&#8217;s bubble, but there is no Social Security Trust Fund.  The Social Security Administration (SSA) is required by law to &#8220;invest&#8221; any surplus in special U.S. Treasury bills.  In turn, the Treasury uses the money to pay for current government expenditures.  When it comes time for the SSA to redeem these special T-bills, they go the Treasury for payment.  The U.S. Treasury has four options to come up with the money:  raise taxes; cut spending in other areas of the budget; borrow the needed funds; or monetize the debt (i.e. create the money out of thin air). </p>
<p>The average retiree receives $1,150 a month.  Had the CPI rose (instead of fallen) by the long-term average of 2.5% the COLA would come out to an additional $28.75 a month, on average.  If the president and Congress are afraid ask retirees to forego an additional $29 in Social Security payment for one year, how will they have the political courage to reduce the $100 billion in Medicare funding needed to make the various health care reform bills revenue neutral?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/retirees-will-receive-a-cost-of-living-adjustment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Value-Added Tax Explained</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/the-value-added-tax-explained/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/the-value-added-tax-explained/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:35:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=179</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dan Mitchell of Cato and the Center for Freedom and Prosperity provides an explanation (via YouTube) of the impact a value-added tax would have on the budget. h/t Mark Perry&#8217;s Blog Carpe Diem]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.freedomandprosperity.org/press/p10-14-09/p10-14-09.shtml">Dan Mitchell of Cato</a> and the Center for Freedom and Prosperity provides an explanation (via YouTube) of the impact a value-added tax would have on the budget.</p>
<p>h/t <a href="http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/10/vat-it-would-be-like-giving-whiskey-and.html">Mark Perry&#8217;s Blog Carpe Diem</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/the-value-added-tax-explained/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U. of Chicago Economist Steven Davis Proposals for Job Creation</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/u-of-chicago-economist-steven-davis-proposals-for-job-creation/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/u-of-chicago-economist-steven-davis-proposals-for-job-creation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Oct 2009 15:29:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=177</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Economist Steven Davis puts together a list of proposals Congress and the president could enact to spur job growth&#8212;without the federal government spending additional money. h/t Greg Mankiw&#8217;s Blog]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/14/unemployment-efca-health-care-opinions-contributors-steven-j-davis.html">Economist Steven Davis</a> puts together a list of proposals Congress and the president could enact to spur job growth&#8212;without the federal government spending additional money.</p>
<p>h/t <a href="http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/">Greg Mankiw&#8217;s Blog</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/15/u-of-chicago-economist-steven-davis-proposals-for-job-creation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Paper:  Macroeconomic Effects from Government Purchases and Taxes</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/01/paper-macroeconomic-effects-from-government-purchases-and-taxes/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/01/paper-macroeconomic-effects-from-government-purchases-and-taxes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 13:50:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=174</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In September, Harvard economists Robert Barro and Charles Redlick published a working paper titled:  Macroeconomic Effects from Government Purchases and Taxes.  The paper looks at past economic data in order to develop a multiplier for government expenditures.  Their research found for defense spending, the multiplier was 0.6-0.7&#8211;until the unemployment rate reach 12%, at which time it [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In September, Harvard economists Robert Barro and Charles Redlick published a working paper titled:  <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w15369">Macroeconomic Effects from Government Purchases and Taxes</a>.  The paper looks at past economic data in order to develop a multiplier for government expenditures.  Their research found for defense spending, the multiplier was 0.6-0.7&#8211;until the unemployment rate reach 12%, at which time it neared one.    Barro and Redlick also found higher marginal tax rates reduced growth in GDP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/10/01/paper-macroeconomic-effects-from-government-purchases-and-taxes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Items in the News</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/21/items-in-the-news-2/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/21/items-in-the-news-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2009 13:52:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fed Rejects Geithner Request for Study of Governance Structure &#8212; bloomberg.com Blame Friedman:  Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bailout &#8212; Kevin Williams, nationalreview.com Stimulus Spending Sags After Deadline Rush &#8212; The Washington Times The President&#8217;s Best Hope in the GOP &#8212; The New York Times Amid Health Reform, Massive Medicare [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&amp;sid=adjvXg1zP.zY">Fed Rejects Geithner Request for Study of Governance Structure</a> &#8212; bloomberg.com</p>
<p><a href="http://nrd.nationalreview.com/article/?q=NThkZTQ0ZGFlN2FhOWRmNWE4NTY4NmU5Y2Y0NDVkMTk=">Blame Friedman:  Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bailout</a> &#8212; Kevin Williams, nationalreview.com</p>
<p><a href="http://">Stimulus Spending Sags After Deadline Rush</a> &#8212; The Washington Times</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/21/us/politics/21caucus.html?_r=1">The President&#8217;s Best Hope in the GOP</a> &#8212; The New York Times</p>
<p><a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/59525-amid-health-reform-medicare-agency-is-headless">Amid Health Reform, Massive Medicare Agency Still Headless</a> &#8212; The Hill</p>
<p><a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/ap/president_obama_speaks_on_the_economy_monday_in_ny_then_hits_another_tv_show-59979302.html">President Obama Speaks on the Economy in NY Then Hits Another T.V. Show</a> &#8212; The Washington Examiner</p>
<p><a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/house/59511-boehner-mcconnell-counter-obamas-news-show-blitz">Boehner, McConnell Counter Obama&#8217;s Healthcare Blitz, Say Votes Aren&#8217;t There</a> &#8212; The Hill</p>
<p><a href="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9ARIP8G0&amp;show_article=1&amp;catnum=3">Spin Meter:  $2 Trillion in Health Savings?  Where?</a> &#8212; Breitbart.com (via <a href="http://betsyspage.blogspot.com/">Betsy&#8217;s Page</a>)</p>
<p><a href="http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2009_09_20-2009_09_26.shtml#1253489281">Does a Federal Mandate Requiring the Purchase of Health Care Insurance Exceed Congress&#8217; Powers Under the Commerce Clause?</a> &#8211; The Volokh Conspiracy (via <a href="http://pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/">Instapundit</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/21/items-in-the-news-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Items in the News</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/18/items-in-the-news/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/18/items-in-the-news/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:20:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=169</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Affordability Is Major Challenge for Reform &#8211; The Washington Post Baucus and the Threshold &#8212; Paul Krugman, NY Times New Tax in Senate Health Plan Draws Bipartisan Fire &#8212; New York Times Obama Begins Health Plan Media Blitz &#8212; The Washington Times]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Affordability Is Major Challenge for Reform &#8211;</strong> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/17/AR2009091704740.html">The Washington Post</a></p>
<p><strong>Baucus and the Threshold</strong> &#8212; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/opinion/18krugman.html?_r=1">Paul Krugman, NY Times</a></p>
<p><strong>New Tax in Senate Health Plan Draws Bipartisan Fire</strong> &#8212; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/18/health/policy/18health.html?ref=politics">New York Times</a></p>
<p><strong>Obama Begins Health Plan Media Blitz</strong> &#8212; <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-begins-health-plan-media-blitz/?feat=home_headlines">The Washington Times</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/18/items-in-the-news/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Stimulus Didn&#8217;t Work</title>
		<link>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/17/the-stimulus-didnt-work/</link>
		<comments>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/17/the-stimulus-didnt-work/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:36:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>daniel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taxpolicyforum.com/?p=166</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Economists John Cogan, John Taylor, and Volker Wieland have an opinion piece in today&#8217;s Wall Street Journal in which they have analyzed recent economic data and concluded the recent federal government stimuls plan did nothing to increase consumption or economic growth.  A couple of questions arise from their conclusion:  1) what will be the impact [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Economists John Cogan, John Taylor, and Volker Wieland have an opinion piece in today&#8217;s <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204731804574385233867030644.html">Wall Street Journal</a> in which they have analyzed recent economic data and concluded the recent federal government stimuls plan did nothing to increase consumption or economic growth. </p>
<p>A couple of questions arise from their conclusion:  1) what will be the impact on the economy be when the federal government has to raise taxes or cut spending to pay back the principal and interest on the $797 billion stimulus bill?  2) will the same economists who said the stimulus would create millions of jobs be the ones who will judge whether any health care reform bill passed by Congress will or will not add to the deficit?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://taxpolicyforum.com/2009/09/17/the-stimulus-didnt-work/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
