Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Research desk is open

Let Dylan Matthews refudiate your questions.

By Ezra Klein  |  July 19, 2010; 11:07 AM ET
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Why the Bush tax cuts won't need 60 votes
Next: Republicans now blaming Democrats for Bush tax cuts


Accoring to "expert scientists" espousing the theory of manmdade global warming, how much more time before apocalypse would the most aggressive Cap & Trade bill buy us?

1 day?

1 month?

1 year?

1 decade?

Posted by: FastEddieO007 | July 19, 2010 11:18 AM | Report abuse

How much 'corporate tax' is collected annually by Fed? If any incentives are proposed so that companies can hire more people, how would it impact that number? Any credible proposals there in terms how such incentives can be accorded to companies so that they hire more?

Posted by: umesh409 | July 19, 2010 11:23 AM | Report abuse

Here's the plan I've been thinking about since Kevin Willis brought it up several weeks ago:

Reduce corporate taxes to a rate that's more competitive with other countries while also closing the loopholes that allow them to avoid paying corporate taxes. Then institute a carbon tax which corporations could opt to pay rather than their normal liability under the corporate tax rate. Their liability under the carbon tax would not exceed the corporate tax rate.

1) How much money would be generated by lowering our corporate tax rates to more competitive levels while closing the loopholes? More or less than we're bringing in now?

2) What level of carbon tax is necessary to meet generally agreed upon carbon emission reduction goals?

3) Is anyone in Washington talking about some kind of trade like this?

The beauty of the plan as I see it is that both sides actually do get something they genuinely want, which is pretty rare these days. Now, my support of the plan is contingent on some kind of determination that it would actually reduce carbon emissions, but it does seem conceptually like it could help.

Posted by: MosBen | July 19, 2010 11:28 AM | Report abuse

I'm still interested in a comparison between the stimulative effects of extending the Bush tax cuts vs. other proposed forms of stimulus.

If that information isn't available, any data on what the stimulative effects of the Bush tax cuts were in actuality would also be interesting.

Posted by: madjoy | July 19, 2010 11:41 AM | Report abuse

What economic assumptions are the projections for depletion of the Social Security Trust Fund based upon? How do those assumptions stack up against historical averages in the US?

Posted by: TXAndy | July 19, 2010 11:44 AM | Report abuse

With all the talk about how unpopular Reagan was in 1982 because of the economy but got really popular by 1982 when the economy had turned around, can you recommend a good book about Regan's first term?

I poked around this weekend on Amazon, and there is not an obvious go-to title.

Posted by: Porchland | July 19, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

I was looking at the historical data provided by BLS. What happened in September 1983 to produce 1.1 million private jobs that month? The number stands out as it is almost 3 times greater than any other months job gains over the past 30 years. Were there any specific policies that took effect that month?

Posted by: machunsk | July 19, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

Oops, really popular by 1984.

Posted by: Porchland | July 19, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

What IRR did a retiree who died in 2010 at age 70/75/80, etc. earn on his social security contributions, assuming median income level throughout working career?

Posted by: cdosquared5 | July 19, 2010 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Can you explain why FICA payroll deductions (for Social Security) are capped on annual salaries at about $104K? What is the rationale for not collecting it on all earned income?

We often read that one "fix" for future Social Security shortfalls is to raise or eliminate this ceiling.

Posted by: nancycadet | July 19, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Since so many people are convinced Obama is a socialist, I would like to see a comparison of the social safety net in the US and a friendly democratic socialist country like Sweden. What do they have compared to what we get? How much more do they pay in taxes for it?

For bonus points, how popular or unpopular are the elements of socialism in that country, and what do people in the US think of the actual policies (ie, if Sweden has everyone covered by health care, do they like it? and how does universal coverage poll here?)

If we are going to have to listen to people holler about socialism, we ought to know the details of what it actually looks like!

Posted by: JAKH | July 19, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Is there really such a thing as a "swing voter?" I can see that there are swing states, where the population is roughly balanced between voters who support each of the 2 major parties; but are there really voters who go back and forth between the parties, or is is all a matter of which party turns out its voters more effectively?

Posted by: quarkpt | July 19, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Are the unemployed any more likely to vote than their employed peers? Are the unemployed more likely to vote for one party or the other (i.e. If I get fired, am I more likely to vote for a Democrat than I once was)?

Posted by: Owen_Truesdell | July 19, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

What proportion of new households in the US are attributable to immigration and what's the relationship of households to housing supply?

Posted by: bharshaw | July 19, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Do we know when the Secretary of the HHS will issue regs on how to implement the short-term ACA changes, such as the elimination or restriction of certain annual caps (such as for prescription benefits)?

The rules take place in September, and I haven't seen anything from HHS yet.

Posted by: Joey-K | July 19, 2010 3:11 PM | Report abuse

Which senators won there seat with > 60% of the vote in a general election?

Posted by: chrynoble | July 19, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

"refudiate" huh? Klein has used the word "province" in place of "provenance." How's that for illiteracy? Pot, meet kettle.

Posted by: truck1 | July 21, 2010 7:25 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company