Worried about the child tax credit debate & wishing men read more novels, I urged people to see it through the eyes of a single mom, with a toddler & a 7 yr-old, who works as a cashier
Here is this morning must-read from @crampell, including “if getting an extra $250 per month allows a single mom greater choice about whether to work the night shift or spend more time with her second-grader, that’s not obviously a bad thing” wapo.st/3p4Dd5R
And she adds: “the poor should not be responsible for bankrolling programs for the poor. Other groups are better able to absorb the costs — particularly the wealthy.”
& likewise @annielowrey: “The argument is that you want babies to grow up sicker and hungrier, do worse in school, do worse in the workforce, and be less likely to finish high school or go to college, because it might have a marginal effect on their parents taking a low-wage job”
And for more on what @annielowery is driving at, this NAS report from @hilaryhoynes and other top scholars is a must-read for all participants in the child tax credit debate: bit.ly/3cRI4EZ
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is a thread on the Romney Child Tax Credit plan. My hope is that somehow it will find its way to liberal commentators who feel an almost giddy impulse to tell their many followers that the Romney proposal is better or just as good or close enough to the Biden proposal
First, picture two people, one woman and one man, both of an age of possibly have young children. Now picture a recent visit to the grocery store, or a recent delivery, or an elderly relative being helped to shower or have lunch
Now suppose the woman your picturing makes about $15,000 a year at one of those jobs – e.g. a cashier or a home health aide -- and she’s a single mom with a toddler son and a daughter who is in second grade
With the Senate GOP expected to unveil its opening proposal next week, it seems important to recall when they initially staked out their position of a scaled-back fiscal response and how much has changed since then:
Thread
In late May, Senator McConnell said that “You could anticipate the decision being made on whether to go forward in about a month. And it will be narrowly crafted, designed to help us where we are a month from now, not where we were three months ago.” cnb.cx/2OFmLcx
The GOP was advocating a two-step approach: aggressive re-openings which would allow for a fiscal retreat. As the President Trump in early June said, “We’re opening and we’re opening with a bang.”
The CARES Act largely worked. As the chart below highlights, policies such as the robust unemployment insurance helped offset the job-loss driven income reduction – a major policy success – providing a lifeline to millions of families across the country:
As the miles-long lines of people idling in cars in wait of food attest, however, the policy response to date has shortcomings and this hardship needs to be addressed when the Congress acts:
@jacsamoby, Kathleen Bryant, and I put out a paper today framed by two points: much of the income of very wealthy people does not show up on their tax returns and often enjoys special tax breaks when it does bit.ly/2qKpqJ3
Thread
@jacsamoby Because of the wealth tax proposals, these issues are getting lots of attention. The piece I think is getting too little attention is how relatively little personal income tax many wealthy people pay, i.e. the current system is not working. A couple of examples:
@jacsamoby First, the man behind the Buffett Rule, which misleadingly only looks at the rate differential between Mr. Buffett and his secretary. The rule ignores most of his income.
On Friday the House is expected to vote on the GOP’s 2.0 tax plan which doubles down on the 2017 tax law’s flaws: tilted in favor of top 1%, loses large revenue right when youngest baby boomers become SS-eligible, and invites tax games. Charts to follow.
The House GOP’s 2.0 tax plan ignores the decades’ long stagnation of working class wages and the substantial upward shift in income:
The House GOP’s 2.0 tax plan exacerbates this upward income shift as it delivers roughly double the income gain to the top 1% than it does for the bottom 60%: