Archive for the ‘Articles’ Category

Support for Ending Means Testing

Tuesday, June 13th, 2023

One of the main points in the ComingTogether Plan is that means testing of benefits reduces the incentive for productive work, and therefore should be eliminated. Recently, two nationally known think tanks have joined us in expressing this concern. Hoover Institution fellow John Cochrane published a blog post making this very point on May 25, 2023. The Goodman Institute published an editorial in Forbes on June 1, 2023. It is publicly available on the Goodman Institute website here.

The Goodman piece makes reference to a paper by David Altig, Alan J. Auerbach, Laurence J. Kotlikoff, Elias Ilin, and Victor Ye that is similar to the “disincentive” analysis on our website, but is newer and much more comprehensive: Marginal Net Taxation of Americans’ Labor Supply. The authors use our methodology of treating loss of benefits the same as a tax and calculating a marginal tax rate based upon the combination of actual taxes and lost benefits associated with increased income. This new paper takes the analysis much further to look at long term effects. The paper gets rather technical, but read at least the Abstract, the Introduction, and the Conclusion. These sections particularly make clear the excessive complexity in our system of government benefits and taxation.

In the current situation with so many able-bodied, working-aged adults not participating in the work force, we really need to understand why that is the case and change the incentives so that more people are productive.

Our Representatives Did It Again

Tuesday, March 23rd, 2021

The America Rescue Plan Act was passed and signed into law earlier this month. Another bad short-term response to long-term issues.

The two lead items in most reports are a $1,400 per person payment and continuing the temporary increase in unemployment benefits – both requiring people to be unproductive in order to obtain the money. The means testing of benefits has got to go to incentivize productivity. Furthermore, the unemployment benefits were made more valuable since they are no longer taxable income, further reducing the incentive to be employed. I presume that is why so many businesses are having trouble finding employees; it pays so much better to not work.

It is sad that this $1,400 per person payment is just temporary support offered the citizens of this country, when this current situation is a chance to meaningfully reform government benefits. How long will $1,400 last? Then what? We need to decide as a country that no citizen is to go without certain basic resources — food, housing, medicine for examples. To do that, let’s provide benefits to every citizen. No waiting for some bureaucrat to decide you are worthy. No insecurity that you might do some otherwise reasonable activity that terminates the benefits.

A third flaw is found in the size of the bill. The $1,400 payment that gets the most press is less than a quarter of the amount appropriated. Generally, a temporary relief bill to get past a temporary disaster should not be larger than the lost economic activity. That tends to be quite inflationary, and shows that the bill is not really about relief. Even Larry Summers, a very liberal economist who was the Secretary of the Treasury under Clinton, uses this criteria to say that the bill is way too big. He suggest a maximum of $380 billion, or a little less than the direct payments to the citizens. See https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/04/larry-summers-biden-covid-stimulus/.

Fourth, this bill includes so many things not related to COVID. Examples:

  • Reduce flexibility of GI Bill education benefits.
  • Aid to state and local governments when their revenues are only down .4% (Wall Street Journal, 3/13/2021) — certainly an amount that any budget should be able to handle as out of contingency funds.
  • Doubling down on Obamacare, trying to rescue that failed program.
  • $270 million to the National Endowment for the Arts and National Endowment for the Humanities.
  • $50 million to the Environmental Protection Agency while lower economic activity has reduced pollution.
  • $50 million to family planning services as outlined in Title X.

Fifth, we see that this bill shows that our representatives value teacher unions over the actual education of our children. This bill only supports government-run schools at a time when the pandemic has revealed the flaws of those schools to so many parents. Further evidence that this is not about the pandemic is that the aid to schools can run through 2024 — long after the pandemic is expected to be over. Note that schools have not yet spent all the money from pervious stimulus bills (Kiplinger Letter 2/26/2021).

This bill also increases the child tax credit. Again, this benefit is means tested, temporary, and there is no requirement to spend it on basic needs. We also would prefer to see an agency other than the IRS distributing benefits. They are not known as compassionate or timely — both important characteristics of agencies distributing benefits. (Note Romney’s recent proposal for child benefits would fix this last issue.)

Congress Did It Again

Tuesday, December 22nd, 2020

Another bad short-term response to long-term issues. The massive bill was passed Monday that is being referred to in the media as a stimulus bill. It seems like the 116th Congress is trying to recover from their appalling lack of productivity over the last two years all in one 5500 page bill.

The two lead items in most reports are a $600 per person payment and another temporary increase in unemployment benefits – both requiring people to be unproductive in order to obtain the money. The means testing of benefits has got to go to incentivize productivity.

It is sad that this is just temporary  support offered the citizens of this country, when this current situation is a chance to meaningfully reform government benefits. For the 54 million people that are considered “food insecure”, how long will $600 last? We need to decide as a country that no citizen is to go hungry. To do that, let’s provide a food benefit to every citizen. No waiting for some bureaucrat to decide you are worthy. No insecurity that you might do some otherwise reasonable activity that terminates the benefits.

A third flaw is found in the moratorium on evictions. It is not that we do not want people to be housed. The complaint is that this provision is an unfunded mandate that causes a significant burden on landlords. This moratorium means that those providing housing have to continue providing it whether they are paid or not. It is probably already too difficult to evict for nonpayment, but this makes it worse. Now, how many people considering going into the housing rental business will decide that is a bad idea, since renters do not need to pay. Once this precedent has been set, expect less housing to be available, particularly at reasonable pricing — not the desired outcome. Again, we do not want to see any citizen without housing, so let’s provide a housing benefit for every citizen. Then landlords know that a certain amount of money will be available to pay rent.

Update 12/23/2020: The President agrees with this article that $600 per person is inadequate. He proposes amending the bill to provide $2,000. Rather than increasing the amount, how about making this a monthly payment and eliminate the means testing? That would eliminate the “food insecurity”. It could provide some protection to landlords by requiring that part of this money be used for rent, say ½ or ⅔, to obtain a deferral of eviction.

Election 2020

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020

As the polls are closing here locally, I am saddened to think how much discord we have seen among fellow Americans during this election season — all to choose between two men, neither of which are really presidential material. I am calling for us to be gracious to each other, especially considering that most of those that voted differently were not happy with who they voted for — they just chose the lesser of the evils. Notice how much of the campaign was attacks on the candidates, rather than putting forth real ideas to improve the country?

I have friends that I love and respect on both sides. I know both sides have goals to help other Americans, as evidenced by the COVID relief passed by large, bipartisan majorities. I would love to see more people willing to work together consistently in positions of authority.

As we have seen the acrimony increasing from election to election, we have created  the ComingTogether Plan described on this website. This proposal is a plan that Americans take care of Americans without trapping them on welfare and without getting the government involved in the detail decisions of life. Why do we require divorces for some people to get benefits, or take away benefits when people get married? Why do we incentivize people to not be productive?

Whoever wins the White House, remember Jesus Christ is still the King, and he calls us to love one another.

God bless y’all!

COVID-19 Relief Bill

Friday, September 11th, 2020

Congress is currently considering another bill in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We have another article on why these bills would have been much less necessary if the ComingTogether Plan was in place. However, given that nothing like it is currently available, there is one aspect of the Plan that could be put in place fairly quickly if Congress would put it in the next bill. That is the Education Benefit.

Many have spoken of the need to help state and local governments due to increased expenses and lower tax revenue. One of the major costs paid by state and local government is education. If the education benefit were implemented now, that benefit would direct significant funding to schools, reducing the expenses borne by those governments.

To get this benefit up and running quickly, the process of paying the benefit would be modified from the original ComingTogether Plan. Basically, each accredited school or home school curriculum provider would send to the government a list, via Internet, of the citizens enrolled in their schools, say on the 1st of each month for September through December and February through May. The list would include the Social Security number, name, birthdate, and grade level for each student. There would be two simple (for computers) checks on this data: 1) The name, birthdate, and Social Security number must match the records of the Social Security Administration, and 2) the data would be checked for duplicates. Any person listed on more than one school’s report would be disqualified for both schools, and any duplicate grade level and month for a particular student would not be paid. After eliminating any disqualified students, a payment would be made to each school in the amount of the monthly benefit multiplied by the number of qualified students enrolled on the first day of the month. That should be able to be done by the end of the month.

This system is simple enough that if this bill were passed in the next few days, benefits could be being paid by November. Note that due to unnecessary complications, most of the benefits in earlier relief bills have not yet been paid. We wish to avoid that. Keep it simple, and keep it fair by treating every citizen the same way.

We would hope that with this benefit up and running, Congress would in 2021 implement the tax reform specified in the ComingTogether Plan to cover the cost of this benefit starting in 2022.

We are proposing a monthly benefit of $500 per month per qualified student. News media has reported estimates ranging from $400 to $2,300 per student of additional costs per student due to COVID-19, so $4,000 per year should more than cover those special expenses and still provide additional revenue to schools to mitigate the lower tax revenues being received by state and local governments.

Lessons from the Lockdown

Thursday, September 3rd, 2020

The COVID-19 outbreak is the worst crisis the United States has faced in many years. In past crises, US citizens have typically come together, worked together to solve the problem, and celebrated together when the crisis passed. This time seems different. Political discord seems to continue through the crisis, with a level of malice not seen before the last few years.

Surveys indicate that much of the current discourse is coming from the most extreme individuals at both ends of the spectrum, with the middle 60% to 80% just unhappy with the tone of the discussion. (It is that large middle group which is expected to find the ComingTogether Plan appealing and most welcome.) That Plan is intended to be a reasonable compromise that allows both compassion and liberty to flourish.

The COVID-19 crisis provides five lessons which point  out the value of the ComingTogether Plan:

Financial Aid: Shortly after the lockdown started, the CARES Act authorized a one-time payment to many people in the country, but the government was not really prepared to do this. They were slowed down by the need to determine income to establish eligibility. If this is going to be a response to a crisis, the government should be prepared. If the ComingTogether Plan had been in place, this would have been unnecessary. The plan would have a system up and running to meet the basic needs of all citizens, and the financing plan would also be there (although when the economy declines, revenue goes down also).

Unemployment: The CARES act also included a supplement to unemployment insurance. Again, this would be unnecessary if the ComingTogether Plan had been in place. This experience, though, reinforces the Plan’s argument against means testing. Why would people try to go back to work when ‘not working’ pays more?

Grassroots Decisions: The pandemic is an excellent example of the benefit of a federal (multi-level) system where decisions are made at the level of government closest to the people where possible. Different places experienced different types of pandemic activity, and local government officials could set their own response. This is one of the major tenets of the ComingTogether Plan. In fact, the Plan puts many decisions all the way down to the family level.

Healthcare: We have got to get health coverage separated from employment. When 40 something million people lose their jobs in a short period of time, we find that there is quite a bottleneck in replacing all that coverage. If people could choose their own  coverage, as in the ComingTogether Plan, the loss of a job, while still traumatic, does not also mean needing to find health care coverage at the same time as they are looking to replace the paycheck.

Education: COVID-19 has shaken no institution more than education. This may be a good thing. Suddenly, many parents and children find themselves at home. Parents are finding out how little the children are learning; or, on a positive note, parents are finding out what their children are good at, and love to do. This information shows parents the shortcomings of a one-size-fits-all school. Giving parents a voice in their child’s education would be helpful. Schools are also facing budget breaking adjustments to try to operate in the new environment. Here is where the ComingTogether Plan‘s Education Benefit really shines. It gives parents more control of the education their children receive. The Education Benefit is something that could be passed and implemented quickly to help parents, children, and state and local governments.

The United States is divided now, but it has been worse, including the time when there was actually war between the states. As the Civil War was winding down, Abraham Lincoln said in his second inaugural address:

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Can we follow Lincoln’s call to peace within the country? I hope the ComingTogether Plan can be part of the solution to ending the current discord in our country.

What child does not have special needs?

Monday, April 21st, 2014

We were gratified recently to learn of the Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Account program. This provides a debit card that accesses a bank account funded by the state government that can be used to pay educational expenses. This sounds exactly like the ComingTogether Plan’s Education Benefit, although it is being provided at the state level rather than the federal level.

It is a start, but it does not go far enough. (more…)

Should we raise the debt limit?

Wednesday, October 9th, 2013

I have been asked recently whether or not the Congress should raise the debt limit. It would be foolish not to. The economy cannot stand and immediate cut off of $1.85 from the federal spending, so some increase needs to be allowed.

However, this opportunity could be used to impose some discipline for the long run. (more…)

Elections 2012: One Nation, Indivisible?

Wednesday, November 7th, 2012

OK, the election is over. The United States will have another two years of divided government at the Federal level. Will anything get done? Or, will the elected leaders keep kicking the can down the road? The concession speeches talked about ComingTogether to move forward. Can this happen after such a negative campaign?

We hope so. It will take focusing on the principles that are really important to the majority of Americans, things almost all can agree on, such as freedom and compassion. The ComingTogether Plan website proposes a plan, based upon those principles, to fix the problems with taxation, health care costs, Social Security, and welfare. (more…)

Elections As Usual – 2010

Friday, January 14th, 2011

Our take on the 2010 elections includes two major points:

  1. We are disturbed to see how far politicians will go with their negativeness. The United States has so much going for it, why do we have to concentrate on the negatives? The political nominees should act more like candidates for employment. Let them present their credentials and ideas, and then let the voters decide. If you went into a job interview and only bad mouthed the other candidates, would you expect to get the job? We saw a lot of signs saying, “Had enough? Vote [insert any party name here]!” Nothing positive.
  1. In the context of the previous federal elections, we see a big swing in voters’ attitudes in only two years. Why? It is easy for the party out of power to bad mouth the party in power. It is always easier to be a critic than a performer. This is a big part of why negativism is a problem. The last two federal elections show that the public is not satisfied with either side. We believe there’s a reason for this: the majority of Americans hold core beliefs which fall between the extreme positions taken by the political parties. (more…)

Taxes in disguise

Sunday, August 22nd, 2010

We often define taxes as our money (or time) used for government purposes. This is not a dictionary or legal definition; that definition would be “money paid to the government for public purposes.”  But does it really matter whether or not it is paid to the government? If the government requires us to spend money in a certain way, they can say that no tax was raised and be legally correct — but the effect on my pocketbook is the same, whether I write the check directly to the government, or pay someone else to satisfy a government mandate. I still cannot use that money as I wish. (more…)

Let's Be Rational about Health Care Rationing

Sunday, August 30th, 2009

Most current public discussion of health care reform omits our ComingTogether Plan option — by painting a false dichotomy between what we have now and government run health care. We offer a third, more balanced, choice. (more…)

Auto Industry Bailout

Friday, January 9th, 2009

We see in the news that the American auto industry is having difficult times, but we need to be careful about that generalization. While it is true that the three major US-based companies are in dire financial straits, that is by no means the entire American auto industry. Many other companies have production facilities in the United States. We do not see Toyota and Honda asking for bailouts. Why? (more…)

Tax Credits

Thursday, October 16th, 2008

In the political campaigns of 2008, candidates of both parties have proposed tax credits to accomplish certain social welfare objectives. This is in contrast to the ComingTogether Plan’s approach of separating the tax system from the benefits. Why do we think our approach is better? (more…)

Subprime Financial Crisis: Causes and Solutions

Thursday, October 9th, 2008

Reasons

For the financial crisis of 2007-2009, there is plenty of blame to go around. Generally, the United States economy is robust enough to deal with mistakes — yes, the people that make mistakes suffer, but normally there is not serious impact on the whole economy. In this case, the majority of the people in this country, as well as many others around the world, have experienced difficulties. The following contributed to the perfect storm that resulted in the Subprime Financial Crisis: (more…)

Economic Stimulus

Friday, February 21st, 2003

In January of 2003, President George W. Bush proposed several programs for the purpose of stimulating the United States’ economy. This article provides comments on these proposals from the viewpoint of the ComingTogether Plan. (more…)