Your 'Greed Economics' Doesn't Fit

One of the signature Republican proposals since they took control of the House in 2010 has been tax cuts and reforming the tax code. In 2015, E.J. Dionne, columnist for The Washington Post, wrote that "Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI.) values his reputation as a serious policy analyst and a genial soul. But he’s not above name-calling, and he insists that President Obama’s budget is the product of 'envy economics.'” Ryan's own plan cuts taxes to the rich while also cutting services to the poor and middle class. So, Dionne states, isn't it fair to call Ryan's economic plan "greed economics"?

—
The posters in this series reflect the conflicts the American political system has been experiencing during the turbulent period between 2010-2018. They are meant to encourage an exploration and a dialogue about the cultural minefield we now find ourselves in.

In 2018, nothing has changed, except the GOP holds, not just the House, but the Senate and the presidency. And, in December 2017, Congress voted to enact its tax plan and the president signed it. Similar to the GOP's 2015 proposal, the law will reduce taxes to the rich while cutting programs to many middle class and poor to pay for a loss in revenue. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, a non-partisan research institute which focuses on fiscal responsibility in equitable ways, called this plan "irresponsible."

According to their analysis, "Despite...looming fiscal pressures, congressional Republican leaders have abandoned their earlier pledges to pursue revenue-neutral tax reform. Instead, they’re aggressively advancing a costly tax cut. Together, the bill’s revenue loss and associated debt service costs would add $1.7 trillion to deficits and debt between 2018 and 2027, and would bring the debt to 97 percent of the GDP by 2027."