Are you sure you want to delete this post?
I haven't read the bill or any advanced analysis, just some commentary and summaries.
From what I understand the PB front loads some net-spending (deficits) with back-end net-revenue increases.
EPI estimates the bill would lead to a lower deficit over a decade than current law. theweek.com/articles/612550/progressive...
Then I read this nonsense from one of the Co-Directors of Social Works. huffingtonpost.com/nancy-altman/the-pro...
"Pub. L.101-508, title XIII, Sec.13301(a), Nov. 5,1990,104 Stat.1388-623, unambiguously states that Social Security “shall NOT be counted as new budget authority, outlays, receipts, or deficit or surplus for purposes of - (1) the budget of the United States Government as submitted by the President, [or] (2) the congressional budget.”
I'm not sure the Co-Director of Social Security Works or the Congressional Progressive Caucus understands how Social Security 'works.' Shows a very poor understanding of the monetary system that we have. Sets up precedent for concessions in future with the 'bad' politics of higher regressive taxes to 'fund' higher payments to retirees, while creating more confusion about the deficit which only aids Deficit Terrorists. This needs to be taken out of the "People's Budget" and more comprehensive legislation guaranteeing all Social Security payments independent of any tax revenue needs to take its place.