Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Universal Savings Accounts a Silver Lining in GOP Tax Reform

The Republican tax plan contains one reform worth cheering for.

This week, House Republicans did what they do best: offer to cut taxes and add to the deficit. Their three-part reform plan is round two of their goal to dramatically slash taxes and reform the nation's tax code. The move is likely a political one, because it isn't fiscally responsible. Yet it carries with it the seed for an important reform.

It's hard to look at the reform package without thinking of it as an attempt to influence the November midterm elections and help Republicans keep control of the House. It's sending a strong signal that for the time being, if you elect Republicans, your probability of paying lower taxes is much higher than if you elect a Democrat. The first round of tax cuts for individuals and small businesses that were passed last December as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is currently set to expire after 2025. Making those cuts permanent is perceived as popular across the board.

In reality, this is just an illusion since all tax cuts will be short-lived. The Republican Party consistently refuses to control spending or even talk about controlling spending. The result is the return of trillion-dollar deficits forever and an exploding debt, driven mostly by spending on programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid.

One would think that the main cause of this inertia is a campaign promise made by President Trump to not touch Medicare and Social Security. Unfortunately, looking at the past shows a long-held belief that talking about entitlement reform—with the exception of Medicaid, which only affects lower-income Americans—is bad politics. It's only to be mentioned when not in power and the chance of implementing reform is null.

All that said, there are aspects of the reform plan worth mentioning and cheering for. The Family Savings Act of 2018 includes some important attempts to ease rules around retirement savings and startup companies, among other changes. One change would simplify retirement savings. Another would create new universal savings accounts (USAs), while two others would expand the use of 529 education savings accounts and let families access their own savings to support parental leave.

The most innovative of these measures by far is the USAs—a reform I've written about in the past. The idea is to encourage savings by granting taxpayers a tax incentive to save, with total flexibility over the timing and use of the money saved.

Many of us are familiar with the different vehicles that currently exist to save money for retirement, college, and medical expenses. They all face different tax treatments, limits, and constraints on how and when the money can be used without facing a tax penalty, and some of these accounts aren't available to all workers. Not so with USAs. They circumvent those rigidities by allowing taxpayers to annually contribute up to $2,500 of after-tax income to an account in which the savings would grow over time without any additional taxes paid on interest. Withdrawals would be tax-free, no matter how and when the money is spent.

While this is a good start, the $2,500 contribution is too small for Americans to really reap the benefit of these new savings accounts. And these benefits are numerous. A Cato Institute report by Chris Edwards and Ryan Bourne describes how the United Kingdom implemented its own version of USAs but allows for an annual contribution of $25,000 to benefit earners of every age and income level. So did Canada. Its $4,125 contribution limit is more modest than in the U.K.'s, but it's still higher than the one proposed by House Republicans.

These two countries' account designs are also superior to those of the current Roth IRA accounts we have in the United States in that they aren't limited to retirement savings and don't face withdrawal penalties. Americans who use Roth IRA accounts face a withdrawal penalty if they use their earnings before they turn 59 1/2 years old.

As Edwards and Bourne document, these flexible savings accounts are extremely popular in both countries. They note, "Liquidity is important to people with moderate incomes because they are more likely than others to face short-term contingencies that strain their resources." Let's hope this flexibility and this new saving options will be available to Americans soon.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • David Nolan||

    Yeah, but those USA's are yet another middle-class freebie -- when the rich already subsidize half the entire share of the core middle class income tax ($40-99k) Then the subsidized income tax subsidizes nearly half of all Medicare spending -- thus an even bigger middle class freebie. (The Trust Fund would have otherwise be bankrupt, several years ago. But the Bushies bailed out a proggie program)

    It's not the entitlements that are the problem. They're only part of the huge and growing middle-class gravy train. Which reminds me

    "Democracies prosper until the majority learns how to vote itself ever increasing subsidies from the public treasury ... paid for by taxes on others"

    "That's not MY fault. I didn't create it or even ask for itt."

    Yeah, but you support a President who FAILS to even see it (yawn), has already made it much worse. and will continue making it worse. Yes, the other tribe does it too (yawn)

    I see many Trumpsters and/or conservatives here whining about the welfare state ... when THEY get the most "welfare." Hellio? They VOTE. Do the math.

    Increasing the debt to buy votes? Never happen here!
    Sucker. (literally)

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Hihn/Mary Stack wants Communism.

    All money should go to government.

    In Mother Russia, the government sucks you.

  • perlchpr||

    As much as I hate to say it, it's got a point. The Republicans are using the same "Soak the Rich to buy votes" tactic as the Democrats.

  • ||

    As much as I hate to say it, it's got a point.

    It's a trap.

    You'll acknowledge that totally-not-Michael-Hihn has a point. Then it'll say something that's tangentially related to the point you tacitly acknowledged but is completely unhinged. You'll wonder out loud if you're talking to the same person you were two posts prior and find yourself on a list.

    Trump supporters, and even to a degree Trump himself readily acknowledge the welfare state. The problem is they don't acknowledge the welfare state the way totally-not-Michael-Hihn thinks they should acknowledge the welfare state; with beyond deranged incoherence.

  • David Nolan||

    If mad.casual EVER says anything specific, I shall PROVE him full of shit ... with links to ORIGINAL sources.

    You have been called out
    And are WAY above your class here.

  • BYODB||

    Just couldn't help yourself, huh?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Yeah, I couldn't resist crushing him
    I used boldface to shame him in front of everyone.
    And in response to both slander and aggression.

    Now tell us why you defend borrowing trillions to buy votes - because Democrats do it.
    But in fact, Obama left Trump a $585 billion deficit ,, which the New Deal Republican ran up to over a trillion, a 70% increase in two years,

    Obama also left him the longest expansion EVER for an incoming President.
    Trump arrived on third base, and thinks he hit a triple,

    NOT defending Obama -- or anyone -- just pointing out that YOU say Republicans are no better than Democrats. I obviously agree because:

    Left - Right = Zero

  • ace_m82||

    Hihn, you keep switching handles. You need to watch that if you want to keep up your charade.

    God Bless!

  • Sir Chips Alot||

    LOL WUT? what in the hell is going on with this lunatic?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    ace has been stalking me for over a year, indeed a lunatic.
    Plus, of course, NOBODY has challenged a single fact,
    Three Trumptards have been called out as liars, and challenged to prove their purely infantile name-calling with ANYTHING specific. All have been back. NONE of the cowards delivered.

    My winning streak is unblemished. And I ridicule the playground bullies.

  • ace_m82||

    "ace has been stalking me for over a year"

    Well, "Ellis", you haven't been around for a year yet. Hihn has. So you are once again admitting you are him!

    "Plus, of course, NOBODY has challenged a single fact"

    Yeah, you warring with Trumpites is quite entertaining.

    "My winning streak is unblemished."

    Wow, I mean, if you're only talking about here, I haven't cared enough to read all the posts. If you mean literally anything else, that's just sad.

    Didn't you notice I was trying to help you, Hihn? If you want to keep up this charade, then you best double-check which handle you're using before you respond.

    God Bless you, Hihn!

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    lol

  • BYODB||

    Thing is, if one party is already buying votes with the treasury and keeps winning seats why wouldn't you do it too? The alternative is one-party rule, although you really end up there either way.

  • BYODB||

    Thing is, if one party is already buying votes with the treasury and keeps winning seats why wouldn't you do it too? The alternative is one-party rule, although you really end up there either way.

  • BYODB||

    Thing is, if one party is already buying votes with the treasury and keeps winning seats why wouldn't you do it too? The alternative is one-party rule, although you really end up there either way.

  • BYODB||

    Wow, ok. Never using a phone to post again...

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The website is glitchy today.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Says the king of entitlement slurping.

  • David Nolan||

    The website is glitchy today.

    lc1789,
    you have been called out as a liar. A shameful psycho.liar
    You have been challenged to PROVE your slanderous claims.

    You have REFUSED. That's a FAIL.

    The badge of LIAR stands as proven.

    Boldface to defend MY integrity,

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Maga

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Can we Make America Great Again by .... LYING?
    That's what lc1789 says to David Nolan

    You have REFUSED to prove your slanderous lies
    The badge of LIAR stands as proven.


    Maga

    EXACTLY LIKE TRUMP!
    LIE AND SLANDER SOMEBODY.
    WHEN CALLED OUT AS A LIAR, CHALLENGED TO PROVE HIS SLANDERS ...

    Says "Maga"
    and giggles

    Typical Trumptard

  • David Nolan||

    CALLING OUT MORE BULLSHIT FROM lc1789

    How is s that communism? (Do you not know what THAT means also?)

    WHERE do you see "all money should go to the governrnent?"

    Be specific

  • David Nolan||

    lc1789 screams COMMUNISM ... while the Trumtards claims an "entitlement" to sicking the gummint teat...and throws his own father under the bus. Fully documented ... his own words. (this is self-defense)

    loveconstitution1789|2.8.18 @ 3:08PM|#

    My retired father loves politics and we often discuss the nature of things.

    I cannot get him to openly discuss social security and medicare reform with cuts. He is just hoping to check out before our debt crushes the USA. Its selfish as shit.

    TROLL says more crushing debt is okay .. if lines HIS pocket!
    Insults HIS OWN FATHER, "selfish as shit" ... but DEFENDS his own sucking at the gummint teat! (OMG)

    WHINES that a multi-trillion debt increase is "giving my own money back " ... FROM WHERE?
    BY STEALING FROM HIS OWN CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN ... with MORE :crushing debt ... but HE is not selfish as shit!!! Trolling for goobers.

    What kind of fiscal conservative DENIES federal debt steals from our future ... his own children? Brainwashed Republican goobers ... as DANGEROUS as ... brainwashed Bernie goobers

    HED CUT HIS FATHER'S BENEFITS .. AND STEAL FROM HIS OWN KIDS ... TO INCREASE HIS CASH, BECAUSE ... HE'S "ENTITLED."

  • loveconstitution1789||

    This is hihn. Exact quotes from hihn.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Who is hihn? His links show YOU making the ONLY quotes cited.

    I only clicked because I thought he was bat-shit crazy ... but YOU SAID IT ... your father is a piece of shit for ignoring our crushing debt ... but love(sic)constitution1789 is ENTITLED to INCREASE that debt!

    Are you a blood relative of our crazy President?

  • Mark22||

    TROLL says more crushing debt is okay .. if lines HIS pocket!

    And how is that different from you? You wouldn't survive without government entitlements, and you're so old that you know full well that any entitlement reform isn't going to affect you.

  • David Nolan||

    And how is that different from you?

    Seriously????
    I'll go slowly for you.
    I attack the tax cuts.
    You assume I support them

    I'm an atheist,
    You assume I'm the second coming of Jesus Christ.

    I'm anti-war
    You assume I'm the officer in charge of our military operations in Afghanistan.

    Considering all that, may I assume you're a Trump supporter?

    P.S. If you see someone on crutches, do you trip them? Then kick them on the ground?

  • Mark22||

    I attack the tax cuts. You assume I support them

    Obviously you attack the tax cuts: you want your Social Security and Medicare checks.

    But what do you care about the debt anyway? About ruining the economy? About destroying America's future? Given your age and health, you won't be around to have to live with it, and you have already shown that you are thoroughly amoral.

    P.S. If you see someone on crutches, do you trip them? Then kick them on the ground?

    Not unless you attack me.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    I attack the tax cuts. You assume I support them

    Obviously you attack the tax cuts: you want your Social Security and Medicare checks.

    MOAR cowardly evasion,
    Plus diversion.

    CALLED OUT AS A LIAR

    FAILS TO DEFEND

    Not unless you attack me.

    YOU ATTACKED ME
    HERE

    A TOTALLY UNPROVOKED ASSAULST

    RIGHT-WING SLIME ... PROVEN

  • Mark22||

    I see many Trumpsters and/or conservatives here whining about the welfare state

    You call everybody a "Trumpster."

    ... when THEY get the most "welfare." Hellio?

    Funny coming someone like you who critically depends on Social Security and Medicare.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Apparently, you cannot rebut a single thing he said, but he's too old to know more than you?

    How do you know his age and his total household income?

    What does that have to do with the middle-class getting the most welfare?

    Since you are defending Trump's massive debt increases, why are you not a Trumpster?

    Are you always the vicious asshole that we see here?
    That suggests you may even be a blood relative of the President

  • Mark22||

    How do you know his age and his total household income?

    First, stop pretending: Elias Wyatt and David Nolan are both sockpuppets for you, Michael Hihn.

    How do I know your (Hihn's) age and income? GIven your bragging and rude behavior, you have to expect that people look you up. Based on Google, your web site, and what you have told us here, you're a man in his mid-70's with no significant accomplishments to his name, and, by inference, modest means. If that conclusion is wrong, I won't take your word for it, I'll want to see evidence.

    Since you are defending Trump's massive debt increases, why are you not a Trumpster?

    Even if I had defended Trump's massive debt increases, it wouldn't mean that I agree with Trump on other policy positions.

    Are you always the vicious asshole that we see here?

    Only when responding to vicious assholes like you.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    (lol)

    I see many Trumpsters and/or conservatives here whining about the welfare state

    You call everybody a "Trumpster."

    OMFG
    YOU QUOTED ME SAYING "CONSERVATIVES"
    And NOT everybody ... WTF does "I see many" tell a NON-retard!

    Are you always the vicious asshole that we see here?

    Only when responding to vicious assholes like you.

    And a LITERAL psycho!
    YOU launched the assault, and THIS pack of bullshit was a fresh one.

    Right-wing snowflakes. Authoritarian group-think, like left-wing snowflakes,

    Aggression The action or an act of attacking without provocation

    Stalker A person who harasses or persecutes someone with unwanted and obsessive attention

    Cyberbullying The act of bullying someone through electronic means (as by posting mean or threatening messages about the erson online)

    psychopath A person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behaviour.
    The Authoritarian Left and Right.

    I'm only here to link it from my blog
    I PITY you and your EMPTY life.

    (vomiting)

  • Mark22||

    So I take it that you confirm then that you are "a man in his mid-70's with no significant accomplishments to his name and of modest means".

    Just putting your posturing and political views into context.

  • DaveSs||

    I wonder

    Would there be age limits...like could you open one in your kid's name.

    If you contribute the max, and then when they are an adult the kid does the max as well, the exceptionally long time in the market would net some really big bucks in 50 years.

  • EscherEnigma||

    IIRC, (and recall the jargon correctly) the only thing keeping kids from currenting opening a Roth IRA is that you have to pay into it with your own earnings. So unless your kid has a job baby-sitting or mowing lawns, they can't contribute. Not because of their age, but because of their lack of earnings.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Since he's a fraudster, he could invent income for his kid, and even invent the kid.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Universal Savings Accounts a Silver Lining in GOP Tax Reform

    The Gold Lining in GOP Tax Reform is cutting taxes...again.

    Starve the beast.

    BTW: This is a "n"th D Chess strategy. Tax raises in the future are hard for politicians to sell just like budgets cuts are. See which will win out.

    Tax raises has politicians pushing old people in wheelchairs off cliffs, like budgets cuts has politicians pushing old people in wheelchairs off cliffs.

  • sarcasmic||

    What about the regressive taxes on people who like to consume less-expensive imported goods? Seems like your GOP is giving them she shaft, good and hard.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    They were getting the shaft pre-Trump too.

    At least Trump is trying to get the USA as close to free trade as best as he can.

  • sarcasmic||

    Yeah, they sure were with those 25% tariffs. Oh, wait...

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I know...tariffs are all the trade restrictions there are.

    Google having to spend tens of millions to cater a search engine to the Commies, could not have possibly cost more than 25% in tariffs.

    Its always interesting when people ignore all the other trade restriction costs and focus on Trump's recent tariffs.

  • sarcasmic||

    What the fuck does Google have to do with Trump making poor people pay an additional 25% tax on imported goods?

    And what the fuck do other trade restrictions have to do with Trump making poor people pay an additional 25% tax on imported goods?

    The fact that trade wasn't perfect before these 25% taxes on poor people's consumption justifies making poor people pay 25% more for imports?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Uh-oh, China caved to Trump's negotiation skills after 3.5 months.

    China welcomes US offer of talks as tariffs loom on $200 billion of goods
    -CNN

  • ||

    Uh-oh, China caved to Trump's negotiation skills after 3.5 months.

    I think caved is a bit much. However, it does represent another hallmark where, compared to actual war, trade war is so much better. To the point where it really is more like trade skirmish or some manner of boardgame rather than a war.

  • ||

    Uh-oh, China caved to Trump's negotiation skills after 3.5 months.

    I think caved is a bit much. However, it does represent another hallmark where, compared to actual war, trade war is so much better. To the point where it really is more like trade skirmish or some manner of board game rather than a war.

  • David Nolan||

    mad.casual was challenged earlier, called out as a liar, and DARED to support his or her shameful lie.

    He has FAILED to defend his lie.
    Conclude what you will regarding his integrity, or lack thereof

    (boldface in self-defense)
    (and to humiliate)

  • rudehost||

    Dude you have never in your life won an argument that wasn't with one of your own socks.

    higbn = zero

    I figure if he doesn't know his own name I don't have to either.

  • David Nolan||

    YOU fail also

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • sarcasmic||

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Trumponomics FAIL

    U.S. expects to hit $1 trillion deficit earlier than planned

    The U.S. deficit grew by $222 billion from this time last year — reaching a total of $895 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    Why it matters: This increase was due mostly to the new Republican tax law and Congress' routine decision to increase spending, which grew by 7% compared to revenue growth of only 1%. The CBO now says the deficit will approach $1 trillion by the end of this fiscal year, but in April the agency didn't expect the deficit to reach $1 trillion until 2020.

    Don't forget, Trump campaigned on paying off the entire debt in 8 years! From tariffs!
    Breitbart Do the math.

    Tariff revenues of (19/8=) $2.4T per year ... vs Revenues of $3.3T per year!

    Tariffs are paid by consumers. So Trump PROMISED to increase consumer prices by the equivalent of a 73% tax increase!

    Do the math: $895 deficit, 10 months FY = $89.5 billion per month
    2 months at $89.5 = 179B + 895B = $1.074T.

    Trump's New Deal has increased deficits by a 70% (over Obama) ... in only two years ... and now wants MORE debt! (OMFG)

    Left - Right = Zero

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Trumponomics CRASH

    U.S. expects to hit $1 trillion deficit earlier than planned

    The U.S. deficit grew by $222 billion from this time last year — reaching a total of $895 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    Why it matters: This increase was due mostly to the new Republican tax law and Congress' routine decision to increase spending, which grew by 7% compared to revenue growth of only 1%. The CBO now says the deficit will approach $1 trillion by the end of this fiscal year, but in April the agency didn't expect the deficit to reach $1 trillion until 2020.

    Don't forget, Trump campaigned on paying off the entire debt in 8 years! From his tariffs!
    Breitbart Do the math.

    Tariff revenues of (19/8=) $2.4T per year ... vs Revenues of $3.3T per year!

    Tariffs are paid by consumers. So Trump PROMISED to increase consumer prices by the equivalent of a 73% tax hike!

    Do the math: $895 deficit, 10 months FY = $89.5 billion per month
    2 months at $89.5 = 179B + 895B = $1.074T.

    Trump's New Deal has increased the deficit by **70%** (over Obama) ... in only two years .. and now wants MOAR debt! (OMFG)

    Left - Right = Zero

  • Flinch||

    Check your link again: the claim is laid not on tariffs, but trade deals. Do I believe it? No - congress is not on board, even if the leverage of tariffs can [or do] lead to better trade deals. Tariffs are a form of war; trade deals are an effective armistice. As long as tariffs have an exit strategy/goal, they might work [maybe]. Hooverville informs that improper calibration is a self destruct button, so it's quite a gamble and bigger than Atlantic City.

  • David Nolan||

    Check your link again: the claim is laid not on tariffs, but trade deals.

    Thanks.

    Other than tariffs, with or without trade agreements, I can't think of any other revenue from trade.

    From my Breitbart link

    Trump insisted in the interview that "renegotiating all of our deals" will help pay down the debt by sparking economic growth.

    "The power is trade. Our deals are so bad," Trump said. "I would immediately start renegotiating our trade deals with Mexico, China, Japan and all of these countries that are just absolutely destroying us.
  • loveconstitution1789||

    Funny how you post some unknown Youtube link and then Hihn comes in to save you.

  • David Nolan||

    The links are to Axios and Breitbart -- not YouTube -- ANOTHER of your shameful lies

    Earlier, you were called out as a liar. Challenged to PROVE you slanderous bullshiit.

    You REFUSE to prove THAT lie, and scurry down here for ANOTHER proven lie.

    Your badge as a liar stands, unchallenged

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Maga

  • Mark22||

    What about the regressive taxes on people who like to consume less-expensive imported goods? Seems like your GOP is giving them she shaft, good and hard.

    Your "less-expensive imported goods" are made less expensive by the welfare payments low-skilled US workers receive who could have manufactured that crap in the US.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    So ,,,, if we abandoned out entire welfare state, you say wages would increase in China. Why?

    How would hiring more people, at current prevailing wages, eliminate Chia's cost advantage?
    Or would you take them off welfare and force them to take jobs at wages below the Chinese workers?

    Are you an economic adviser to the President? Or just another low-IQ conservative blowhard?

  • Mark22||

    Or would you take them off welfare and force them to take jobs at wages below the Chinese workers?

    I am not suggesting any particular policy, I'm simply pointing out an economic tradeoff.

    Are you an economic adviser to the President? Or just another low-IQ conservative blowhard?

    What I pointed out is widely recognized; progressives refer to it as a "race to the bottom" and insist on "regulatory harmonization" because of it.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    COWARDLY evasion

    Mark22
    Your "less-expensive imported goods" are made less expensive by the welfare payments low-skilled US workers receive who could have manufactured that crap in the US.

    So ,,,, if we abandoned out entire welfare state, you say wages would increase in China. Why?

    NO ANSWER
    Sniveilng coward

    How would hiring more people, at current prevailing wages, eliminate Chia's cost advantage?

    PROVEN a TOTAL windbag .... .Coward RUNS from the proofl!

    It's not nice to ridicule the retarded. But they keep attacking ... getting crazier and crazier
    JUST LIKE TRUMP!

    ==

    "A man is likely to mind his own business when it is worth minding. When it is not, he takes his mind off his own meaningless affairs by minding other people's business"
    -Eric Hoffer

    Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain, and most fools do.
    --Benjamin Franklin
    Mass movements do not need a god, but they do need a devil. Hatred unifies the True Believers."
    -Eric Hoffer, "The True Believers" (1951)

    Throughout human history, the worst moral atrocitres have been committed by those manipulated to BELIEVE they are defending some "greater good" -- the Collective, the State, the Master Race, the Party or a God. Zealots and fanatics. The militant self-righteous.
    -Me (1994)

    Trump is their enabler.

    Left - Right = Zero

  • Mark22||

    Throughout human history, the worst moral atrocitres have been committed by those manipulated to BELIEVE they are defending some "greater good" -- the Collective, the State, the Master Race, the Party or a God. Zealots and fanatics. The militant self-righteous. -Me

    And that adequately describes you.

    I'm not defending a greater good, I just want lower taxes and to be generally left alone.

  • Flinch||

    If there's a silver lining it's that some people understand that when marginal productivity of debt goes negative, the party's over. Granted that hammer never fully falls on a government - they typically just default and issue new paper as they have the convenience of crafting their own legal shield. But why are we tearing at our neighbors throats over the uniparty? Republicans spend too much and borrow to cover, while dems want that plus more so they raise taxes. I'm over the tax cuts vs. raises thing - it's the spending that matters, and when it exceeds the rate of inflation by nearly double [most of the time] I view it as a long term attack on the economy and the dollar itself and is congressional malfeasance. Anything other than doing away with baseline budgeting is a smokescreen.

  • James Pollock||

    Spending is popular, because every dollar spent shows up as a dollar earned by someone. So the parties fight over what spending will be on, with one side picking one set of beneficiaries and the other side picking a different set. Neither side actually cuts spending, despite how much one of them likes to talk about cutting spending, when they do not have the power to direct spending. When they DO have the power to direct spending, they spend.

    anyone who supports either party because they believe that party will cut spending is a fool, plain and simple.

  • MikeP2||

    "expand the use of 529 education savings accounts "

    In the process of college admission research for my eldest. Every consultants says to not use 529s. Any money in savings accounts like that is immediately factored off the financial aid.

    Paying for college is so unbelievably progressive that it is difficult to fathom why there hasn't been a revolt.

  • James Pollock||

    "Any money in savings accounts like that is immediately factored off the financial aid."

    So your kid gets a smaller loan because you already set aside cash. the problem with that is...

  • GlenchristLaw||

    Since when is it libertarian to use tax policy to reward "correct" uses of money or "correct" vehicles for saving?

  • ||

    Since when is it libertarian to advocate for UBI with an existing welfare state?

    The proposed plan simplifies the tax code and makes investment vehicles more available and more equal than the current system(s). The same fundamental argument that Reason made for UBI.

  • James Pollock||

    "The proposed plan simplifies the tax code and makes investment vehicles more available and more equal"

    Adding more text to the tax code "simplifies" it?

    You want to make investment vehicles more available and more equal? Stop writing the tax code to favor preferred behaviors.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    MAGA!

    MEGA-FAIL!

    U.S. expects to hit $1 trillion deficit earlier than planned

    The U.S. deficit grew by $222 billion from this time last year — reaching a total of $895 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    Why it matters: This increase was due mostly to the new Republican tax law and Congress' routine decision to increase spending, which grew by 7% compared to revenue growth of only 1%. The CBO now says the deficit will approach $1 trillion by the end of this fiscal year, but in April the agency didn't expect the deficit to reach $1 trillion until 2020.

    Don't forget, Trump campaigned on paying off the entire debt in 8 years! From his tariffs!
    Breitbart Do the math.

    Tariff revenues of (19/8=) $2.4T per year ... vs Revenues of $3.3T per year!

    Tariffs are paid by consumers. So Trump PROMISED to increase consumer prices by the equivalent of a 73% tax increase! ... which says all you need to know about the "mental capacity" of Trumptards. (smirk)

    Do the math: $895 deficit / 11 months(FY) = $83.4 billion per month
    83.4x 12 = 0.98T

    MAGA trolls flunk 6th grade math!

  • Mark22||

    U.S. expects to hit $1 trillion deficit earlier than planned

    You must be terribly afraid that the US is going to run out of money before you meet your maker.

    But except for geezers like you, why should anybody else care?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Since when is it libertarian to use tax policy to reward "correct" uses of money or "correct" vehicles for saving?

    Who did that? When? And how?
    Good luck, since she said the exact and precise opposite,

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • John Galt Jr||

    Trumpism crashes

    U.S. expects to hit $1 trillion deficit earlier than planned

    The U.S. deficit grew by $222 billion from this time last year — reaching a total of $895 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

    ... This increase was due mostly to the new Republican tax law and Congress' routine decision to increase spending, which grew by 7% compared to revenue growth of only 1%. The CBO now says the deficit will approach $1 trillion by the end of this fiscal year, but in April the agency didn't expect the deficit to reach $1 trillion until 2020.

    Don't forget, Trump campaigned on paying off the entire debt in 8 years! From his tariffs!
    Breitbart Do the math.

    Tariff revenues of (19/8=) $2.4T per year ... vs Revenues of $3.3T per year!

    Tariffs are paid by consumers. So Trump PROMISED to increase consumer prices by the equivalent of a 73% tax increase! ... which says all we need to know about the "mental capacity" of Trumptards.

    $895 deficit, 10 months FY = $89.5 billion per month
    2 months at $89.5 = 179B + 895B = $1.074T.

    Deficits: Obama's final = $585B. New Deal Republicans = 70% higher.

    Left - Right = Zero

  • Sevo||

    Fuck off, Hihn.

  • creech||

    Please point out Mr. Galt, Jr.'s mistakes. If he is correct, then why does it matter who you think Galt is?

  • Mark22||

    Correct about what? That we have a big deficit? Sure. So what? We would have had the same deficit under Hillary and people like Krugman would have explained at length that it doesn't matter and that it is an "investment in our future".

    As for tariffs being paid by consumers, so what? If you count that as a tax, it's a consumption tax, which I prefer to an income tax anyway, and it's comparable to a European national sales tax. The fact that it is raised on foreign goods only makes it that much better. Unfortunately, one way or another, these tariffs are not going to last.

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    As I've pointed out many times, Left - Right = Further Left

    You just got mathed, bitch!

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Hey, Dumbfuck.
    6 - 6 = Zero
    9 - 9 = Zero
    2,138,790 -2,138,790 = Zero

    When you take Algebra, in junior high, you will learn how that meme of 40+ years works
    It says that right and left are the same value, whatever that value may be. It's an opinion, stated as a supported conclusion,

    Anyone may, of course, disagree with Galt or me.or any other long time libertarian. But to call that a failure in math is .... retarded ... here's why (though I doubt you are able to comprehend it.

    Left - Right = Further Left

    SO retarded that you think equations are about ,... directions .... not numbers? (LOL)

    As I've pointed out many times,

    As many times as you have been humiliated you for doing so, Thus, a slow learner, in addition to your ignorance of Algebra (a Junior High subject)

    And, like here, you jump in into a thread, for the sole purpose of cyber-bullying ... and again fall on your puss

    You will now beat your chest and bellow. Galt may choose to add more. But I am through with you.

    (boldface to call out a thug)

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Beating your chest and bellowing is more of a Hihnbot thing. I'll merely take pleasure in knowing that I'm on your enemies list, living rent-free.

    I'll also correct you:

    (-6) - (6) = -12
    (-9) - (9) = -18
    (-2,138,790) - (2,138,790) = - 4,277,580

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    I'll also correct you:

    You CHANGED it, NOT corrected it -- and you're FAR more stupid than I thought possible. On Algebra. A junior high subject.

    You will continue making a total ass of yourself -- to even a junior high kid who took algebra, -- unless and until you can disprove this simple structure

    If X - Y= Zero, then X and Y have the same value.

    Sorry, since you don't comprehend Algebra, the values for x an y may be any number between minus infinity and plus infinity. But whatever they are, THAT equation says they are NECESSARILY equal.

    To anyone who has completed Junior High,
    How many courses are you taking this year?

    And why are so many right-wingers as ignorant as you are on that equation.

    P,S. X can mean "Left"
    Y can mean "Right"
    Or those values can be reversed.
    Since they are equal, in that equation.

    Libertarians have also been saying, also for nearly 50 years, "Left and Right are obsolete."
    But that one EXPLODES many "brains"

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    BTW, the number line? Second grade, not junior high.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Equations in Grade 2? Sorry, that must be new.
    Now you'd flunk second grade.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • chipper me timbers||

    "Roseanne Barr, whose rebooted show was cancelled after she tweeted racist remarks about former Obama aide Valerie Jarrett. "

    Uhh... you mean "remarks that labeled racist by hysterical SJWs on twitter. You have to squint and stare a long time to say that her comments were indeed racist.

  • chipper me timbers||

    uhh wrong thread sorry

  • Longtobefree||

    No problem. The topics/thread delineations here are pretty much arbitrary guidelines

  • chipper me timbers||

    "In reality, this is just an illusion since all tax cuts will be short-lived. The Republican Party consistently refuses to control spending or even talk about controlling spending."

    That is manifestly untrue. Debt can be serviced by cutting spending on other things. Which is likely what will happen given the public's distaste for raising taxes.

  • shortviking||

    Cutting taxes literally does not add to the deficit. That's like saying cutting pay adds to my credit card debt. Adding to my credit card debt is what adds to my credit card debt.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Are you still in high school? Junior High? Do you frequently humiliate yourself in public? I'll show you

    400 taxes
    500 spending
    100 deficit

    now cut taxes

    300 taxes
    500 spending
    200 deficit (larger, by the precise amount of the tax cut)

    Any questions?
    Are you a Trump supporter?

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    I've got a question! Since it was the rate that was cut, how do you know that the collected taxes will fall by a specific amount, without taking changes in economic growth and business/personal spending habits into account?

    300 + X taxes
    500 spending
    500 - (300+X) deficit (larger or smaller, by the outcome of the tax cut)

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    That, unicorn, may be even crazier than you were here

    Since it was the rate that was cut, how do you know that the collected taxes will fall by a specific amount,

    It's a hypothetical, to focus solely on the issue, hus (and your) ignorance)

    without taking changes in economic growth and business/personal spending habits into account?

    Wait for it ,,,,
    It's the same transaction, at different tax levels ... to PROVE how crazy it is to say that tax cuts so not increase deficits ... as stated by at least four goobers on this page

    It's not nice to ridicule the handicapped. ... especially twice .. so I'll stop, now.

  • EscherEnigma||

    "[…] how do you know […]"
    Know? That's a strong word. No one knows, with absolute certainty, what tomorrow brings.

    But we can make some damn good guesses.

    In this case, we have lots of experiments where Republicans cut taxes but promise it will actually be revenue neutral because of growth. In every single one, the promised growth and revenue-neutrality has yet to appear.

    So sure, it's possible that this tax-cut is a unicorn. But it's not unfair to be very, very, skeptical.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You mean aside from the fact that revenues were actually up 1% this year.

    Now if you can find a case where "stimulus" actually resulted in a net gain to the Treasury, I would love to see it.

  • Agammamon||

    And yet it was the spending that increased the deficit.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Careful with satire, some of these goobers will think you're serious.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • D.E. Plorable||

    May we have just one unbiased article please.

  • Longtobefree||

    New here?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Foc, Breitbart and Infowars may be better suited for you.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • Agammamon||

    Not so with USAs. They circumvent those rigidities by allowing taxpayers to annually contribute up to $2,500 of after-tax income to an account in which the savings would grow over time without any additional taxes paid on interest. Withdrawals would be tax-free, no matter how and when the money is spent.

    That's basically indistinguishable from a normal saving's account. Unless you already have a shit-ton of money in a savings account, the interest in negligible, and the tax paid on it is a rounding error. Everything else - except being limited to $2,500/yr, is what you can already do.

    The tax on the interest paid out for $2500 is something like $25 bucks - a year.

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    A dollar saved is a dollar saved, but it's basically fluff. Mitt Romney proposed the exact same thing when he ran against Obama.

    And with current interest rates the interest paid out is way less than that. My credit union currently pays 0.25% for savings and 0.05% for checking.

    Fluff.

  • EscherEnigma||

    I believe the intent is that the funds in a USA could be invested in bonds and equities, so it wouldn't be quite as bad as the interest rate on a standard savings account.

  • vek||

    Yeah, they didn't mention this, and I'm too lazy to google. If this can be put into other investments vehicles, it would actually be useful. I've never seen the reason in keeping cash in savings accounts, because it's literally a net loss. You're better off stocking up on 5 years worth of toilet paper because inflation will be more than the interest in a savings account... But if you could do something real with it, that would be pretty decent.

  • rocks||

    "This week, House Republicans did what they do best: offer to cut taxes and add to the deficit. "

    Stopped reading there. You are a moron. Obama increased the debt $9T to $20T in his time, but yes let's blame republicans.

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    You drew a conclusion based upon 2 facts that have no relation to each other?

    You're right, it's best that you stop reading.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Trump has ALREADY increased the debt MORE than Obama after EIGHT years in office, (10 year forecast and 10 year mostly actual)

    Obama left Trump a $587 deficit. Trump has upped to a TRILLION at the end of THIS year (which ends this much), a MASSIVE 70% increase ,... and the New Deal Republicans want even MORE>

    Obama increased thee debt from 11.8B o 19.tB, and here's the proof of how badly you've been manipulated and brainwashed,

    You are a moron

    (chuckle)

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Hihn's on my side. I feel dirty.

  • JesseAz||

    Can we stop with the idiocy that tax cuts add to the deficit. This infers that there are no possible spending cuts on the budget side which no actual libertarian should believe. Spending is what adds to the deficit. Just because Washington doesn't know the value of a dollar doesn't mean cuts are spending.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    can we stop with the idiocy that tax cuts add to the deficit

    IDIOCY? Mosty 12-year-olds can do the simple math. I'll teach you

    400 taxes
    500 spending
    100 deficit

    Cut taxes
    300 taxes
    500 spending
    200 deficit.

    The deficit will ALWAYS increase by PRECISELY the amount of the tax cut.

    Spending is what adds to the deficit.

    Trumpsters can be downright scary. And they vote!

    Anything else?

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Please link to the portion of the tax bill that states that the amount collected will drop. The tax rate dropped. This does not linearly correlate with taxes collected.

    Hinhs can be downright scary. And they replicate!

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    On any given transaction, cutting the tax rate will reduce the revenue.
    The only reason it wouldn't would be a separate event, thus not relevant to TAX CUTS, as you've said yourself, elsewhere on this page. Forget?

    If we want to see the effect of tax cuts, then THEY can be the only variable. Elementary.
    No offense, but this topic seems totally beyond your capabilities. Or perhaps it's just math, like your Algebra error,

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Oh, poor hihnnybinny.

    The rates were cut. Not a specific, static amount. The rate is the variable. Rate vs Amount is not linear.

    And my Algebra is correct.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    REPEAT FOR RETARD

    "On ANY given transaction" means a transaction in ANY amount.
    "cutting the tax rate will reduce the revenue" or are you as stupid in multiplication as in algebra?

    Algebra is Left - Right = Zero.
    You have so many verbal assaults and aggression, you cannot keep them straight.

  • ||

    And my Algebra is correct.

    Also, the assumption that the economy can/should only be described by basic algebra rather than multivariate calculus with differential equations is a bit naive.

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    And the transactions are also variable. Will the number of transactions increase/decrease? The value of each individual transaction?

    Far too many assumptions on your part.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    REPEAT FOR RETARD -- #3

    The transactions CANNOT be variable, in that sense.

    1) We wish to see the consequence of TAX RATES being the variable.

    2) If YOU have TWO variables you'll see the consequence of BOTH -- not of tax rates.

    Who ties your shoes?

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    ANOTHER IDEA

    If you have TWO variables, each varying, how can you know WHICH variable caused a different outcome? Ot how much did EACH contribute to the different outcome?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    MAGA

  • bvandyke||

    "The Republican Party consistently refuses to control spending or even talk about controlling spending."

    should read "Politicians consistently refuse......."

    Doesn't matter Republican Party or Democratic Party, neither will cut spending.

  • Echospinner||

    Pathetic. $2500 per year in after tax income.

    How about unlimited contribution in before tax income. Tax to be paid upon withdrawal on income rates.

  • Longtobefree||

    Libertarian website?

    Here we praise the creation of yet another federal program.
    The correct solution is to just eliminate income taxes on interest income, and abolish all the federal programs dealing with all the other programs. Side benefits from the tax code simplification.
    #postcards

  • vek||

    Unless we're talking about a FAR greater restructuring of our entire tax system, removing taxes on all interest income would be a bad idea. It would distort the shit out of a ton of stuff. People would be re-writing all kinds of business arrangements where they are receiving all their income from interest, etc.

    If we went to a fedgov funded by a national sales tax, or some other thing then fine... But fully exempting interest without doing something else radical is not a great idea IMO.

  • David Nolan||

    Giving banks and other lendes a massive tax cut might be a hard sell. S&L's would be totally tax free

  • Sonny Bono's Ghost||

    It took 5 paragraphs to get to the thing mentioned in the Headline. *facepalm

  • Sonny Bono's Ghost||

    Alright. A couple of things.
    1. Can I get everything I've paid into Social Security thus far, deposited into my USA? yeah, prolly not, I tried.
    2. You know what else would encourages people to save? An interest rate somewhere north of inflation (the real one).
    3. The idea of implementing USAs this late in the game seems suspiciously like a prelude to a negative interest rate scheme. If so, you can all burn in hell.

  • Mark22||

    It's funny how the government is trying to stimulate spending in various ways, and then simultaneously trying to stimulate savings with tax breaks.

    How about government stop messing with the economy?

  • tlapp||

    Spending restraint is a winning issue in the abstract. It's a loser in political reality especially as it applies to entitlements. The Trustee Reports are clear about the shortfall but anyone who runs on overhauling them loses. When, not if, it financially crashes the politicians will do what the voters demand and blame the other party. Yes the people have the policies and politicians they desire. Like children they vote for those that say yes to the toys and candy and vote against those that attempt any budget responsibility. I'll keep voting for libertarians or at least libertarian leaning candidates but until we get 40 million more to join us it will be a losing battle.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    You blame voters for the MASSIVE fuckups by the libertarian.eastaslishment.
    You're no think tank but they are, but they do no more than you do
    We shouldn't expect you to have policy solutions, but they should, but have NOTHING for ANYTHING. Nothing for taxes nothing for spending, nothing for healthcare or governance.

    Yes the people have the policies and politicians they desire

    They see NO alternatives,

    Like children they vote for those that say yes to the toys and candy

    TALKING like that is why we lose so god damn every time.

    Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain, and most fools do.
    --Benjamin Franklin
    Complaining about a problem, without posing a solution, is whining.
    -Theodore Roosevelt
  • Mark22||

    You blame voters for the MASSIVE fuckups by the libertarian.eastaslishment.

    You used to be part of that libertarian establishment, didn't you?

    TALKING like that is why we lose so god damn every time.

    No, we lose because jerks like you were part of the libertarian establishment.

    Nothing for taxes nothing for spending, nothing for healthcare or governance.

    Libertarian solutions? Move to flat income tax, privatize social security and medicare, privatize healthcare and eliminate special treatment of employer plans. Seems pretty straightforward.

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Breaking News:

    Mueller now has a plea agreement with Manafort.
    He has pled guilty to 2 charges. The prosecutor withdrew the other 5.
    Not sure yet what he flipped on, because he still forfeits 4 of his 5 his houses. Details are thought to be today. I don't think so. The details will likely stay hidden until tl Trump.'s trial

    But what he pled guilty on is
    1) Conspiracy
    2) Conspiracy to obstruct justice,

  • David Nolan||

    Thanks, Ellis. The conspiracy to obstruct IS the Russian probe,
    The other is "Conspiracy Against the United States" -- detail unknown, or not yet published, but the legal definition includes conspiring to influence an election. We have hard evidence of that conspiracy by Donald Jr,, which the President lied about, as a coverup, so he could be a co-conspirator here too. The exact involvement in that meeting, which he attended is not reported (he would have to have been involved in the meeting planning that was with an agent of the Russian government)

  • ace_m82||

    Hihn, do you really think anyone is buying that there are 2 different people here, one under the handle "Nolan" and the other "Wyatt"? I mean, you forgot which handle you were using and responded using the wrong one earlier!

    It's just sad, Hihn. Why do you find it so necessary to lie?

    "A false witness will not go unpunished, and whoever pours out lies will perish." Proverbs 19:9

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    Do you have ANYTHING on the issues discussed?

    "A false witness will not go unpunished, and whoever pours out lies will perish." Proverbs 19:9

    Where does the Bible authorize unprovoked assault, hypocrite?
    And making a public spectacle of your faith, DEFYING the Son of Almighty God?

    Matthew 6:5

    "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others"
    -Jesus Christ.

    JESUS CHRIST calls you a hypocrite!
    REJECT THE ANTI-CHRIST

    Accept the one TRUE Jesus Christ. Fall on your knees. Beg His forgiveness.
    Bible-Thumping Blasphemer.

    On this entire page, you logged in for the SOLE PURPOSE of attacking me, unprovoked.
    How DARE you quote Scripture to ANYONE?

  • ace_m82||

    "Do you have ANYTHING on the issues discussed?"

    Not really. I don't really care. I saw you infected this comment section and didn't care, as you weren't really making any comment I cared to argue with. But, I saw that you made a familiar error, that you replied to a post with the wrong handle, and I pointed out you should be more careful.

    "Where does the Bible authorize unprovoked assault, hypocrite?"

    In what way was that an "assault"? Show your work.

    "And making a public spectacle of your faith, DEFYING the Son of Almighty God?"

    Telling you "God bless you" isn't a "spectacle". Read Numbers 6:22-26:

    The Lord said to Moses, "Tell Aaron and his sons, 'This is how you are to bless the Israelites. Say to them:

    "'"The Lord bless you
    and keep you;
    the Lord make his face shine on you
    and be gracious to you;
    the Lord turn his face toward you
    and give you peace."'

    And Jesus in Luke 6:28: "bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you". Which reminds me, I need to pray for you, Hihn.

    So, I am simply following God's direct command. Granted, it is quite amazing how you are more angry about a blessing from me than a curse from others!

    Now that the one who loves God's Word has shown the one who hates God's Word what it actually says, are you willing to learn? Or do you need to be taught a few dozen more times, Hihn?

    So, again, in accordance with Luke 6:28:

    God Bless you, Hihn!

  • Ellis Wyatt||

    "Where does the Bible authorize unprovoked assault, hypocrite?"

    In what way was that an "assault"? Show your work.

    (sneer)

    Aggression The action or an act of attacking without provocation

    Verbal Aggressiveness ...A personality trait that predisposes persons to attack the self-concepts of other people instead of, or in addition to, their positions on topics of communication ... Verbal aggressiveness is thought to be mainly a destructive form of communication

    Verbal hostility, or in other words, verbal harassment or abuse is basically a negative defining statement told to or about you or withholding a response and pretending the abuse is not happening.

    Retarded A word used to describe someone who is profoundly stupid. A type of stupidity that is an insult to intelligence itself.

    psychopath
    A person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behaviour.

    Plus MORE defiance of the Word of Christ
    Matthew 6:5 above

  • ace_m82||

    Wow, you defined a bunch of words, and utterly failed to show how my actions matched any of them. Good job!

    Matthew 6:5-6

    "And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

    Now, that same man also said this in Luke 6:28

    "bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you"

    Now, assuming Jesus isn't logically inconsistent, how is that possible? Well, it's quite simple, Hihn, Blessings are not Prayers!

    How are blessings done? To the person being Blessed, and out loud, as seen in Luke 2:34

    "Then Simeon blessed them and said to Mary, his mother: 'This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against'"

    Now, Hihn, will you actually submit to learning or will you insist on being loudly ignorant for the rest of your life?

    Again, in accordance with Luke 6:28:

    God Bless you, Hihn!

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online