So when THEY defend Paul Ryan's plan (against the very much less-than-honest Krugman), you know that Ryan has something good.
(As a bonus, we also learn why the Forbes/elite gang doesn't like Ryan's plan.)
Given that columnist Paul Krugman relied on Tax Policy Center estimates to level claims that Congressman Paul Ryan is a “flimflam man” and that Ryan’s plan to address our fiscal problems is a “fraud,” I think a defense of the Congressman is in order.
First, it is worth citing budget estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). According to CBO, Congressman Ryan’s Roadmap for
...Krugman alleges fraud because CBO did not score the revenue side of the Congressman’s plan....Contrary to Krugman’s claims, this assumption is not unjustified. Ryan has explicitly stated that he is willing to work with the Treasury department to adjust the rates on his tax reform plan to “maintain approximately our historic levels of revenue as a share of GDP.”
Does Tax Policy Center have concerns? Yup:
TPC did analyze Ryan’s tax-specific proposals and found they would fall short of this revenue goal. For example, Ryan’s proposal would lead to federal tax revenue of approximately 16 percent of GDP, which amounts to a $4 trillion revenue shortfall over ten years compared to the alternative fiscal scenario. But that doesn’t mean that Ryan’s plan is a fraud. Instead, it shows that Ryan’s vision of broad-based tax reform, which essentially would shift us toward a consumption tax, needs to be adjusted in order to meet his stated goal of matching historical levels of revenue as a proportion of GDP.
By the way, note the words "consumption tax" in the above graf. Those two words are far more important than the Krugman attacks. They explain the reluctance of the Steve Forbes segment of the Ruling (R) Class to jump on board the Ryan Express.