In rare show of unity, U.S. CEOs call for deficit fix

Comments (33)
kitgainer wrote:

Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan and Boeing are the biggest recipients of corporate Welfare. Any and all tax breaks, bailouts, or buybacks should be canceled out immediately and they should be taxed and penalized for un-re-patrioted overseas profits. These people have run amuck on our dime for long enough.

Oct 25, 2012 2:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
gianthead wrote:

This read like a headline from the Onion. They can’t really believe that the architects of this economic disaster could offer “advice” that anyone might find crediable. I don’t live in the United Corporatons of America.

Oct 25, 2012 9:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:

So all those big corporations back Obama’s plan to help our country?
Of course. They are not stupid sheep like Romney followers.

Oct 25, 2012 10:39am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:

Just more Corporate Self-Interest at work. Cut taxes, take away deductions, which will harm the middle-class most, and cut medical services for the poor. And they’re calling it “bi-partisan”. Yeah, right.

And Congress continues to wait until after the election to see what they want to do – depending on who is elected. Congress isn’t doing what’s best for the country, they’re holding the American people hostage to hatred for Obama.

Oct 25, 2012 10:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
JL4 wrote:

@gianthead, unfortunately, we DO live in the United Corporations of America. Our “Captains of Plutocracy” formerly known as “Captains of Industry” have abandoned the American ship.

Kitgainer is right, and the only way to bring jobs back to the U.S. is to stop them from sending jobs overseas. The way to do that is to offer them tax breaks for creating jobs HERE, not overseas.

The only way to balance our budget is through third grade math: Thoughtfully reduce spending and thoughtfully increase revenue.

It doesn’t make sense to “trim taxes” and then eliminate deductions. The only way to increase revenue that way is to eliminate far more deductions than taxes “trimmed”. They’ll come after homeowner deductions first. (I love that word…”trim”. It sounds so much nicer than “cut”.)

It stuns me that more people don’t see this.

Oct 25, 2012 11:04am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dumdum wrote:

Many of these CEO’s would have more credibility if they and their companies paid some/more taxes

Oct 25, 2012 11:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
possibilianP wrote:

It is truly sickening that this “executive talent” can’t discern that spending cuts will further choke the economy and further reduce the ability to gather revenue, despite the ongoing examples in Europe. In addition, I’m sure these executives called for spending cuts, but not a single one called for ending corporate welfare, without which many large corporations would find it difficult to remain solvent (especially given the enormous executive salaries, bonuses, and other compensation). If we need to look back at an example of paying off a huge debt, look back at the period after WWII, a war that left the US with staggering debt. Did we pay off this debt? NO, we did not. Instead, we grew and inflated our way out of it. The answers to all of our problems are in the history books, because none of this stuff is new. Our issues might have some new feature or twist, but it’s all been done before. Too bad we are too stupid to see it. Our problems could be solved much faster and much more unananimously.

Oct 25, 2012 11:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pec49 wrote:

If these 80 companies had just stayed out of politics in the first place, especially the Wall Street companies, the country would likely not be in the mess that it is.

The way out of the mess includes tighter regulations on large corporations, eliminating huge tax loop holes they use to avoid paying taxes and keeping them out of Washington..

Oct 25, 2012 12:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
madmilker wrote:

It’s a fine time for Corporatist America to be taking a stand now…

The American government was $71 million in debt six years before George Washington wrote his Farewell Address, told those turnips he was fed up with the spending and went back to his farm.

Only been one 10 year period in the past 100 years that the government debt has gone down 1920-1930.

oh! and if it was said that Clinton balance a budget during the nine occasions of him stirring bloomer pudding with a limp cigar….why did the debt go up…

1975 was the last year America had a trade surplus. What has the turnips of corporate America been doing for the past thirty-seven years….

Don’t they understand Retail makes NOTHING….it only moves a countries currency and for the past thirty-seven years they have let Retail in America move that currency out of the hands of the “haves” in the US and into the hands of the “have-nots” in foreign lands.

And what’s the deal with Wal*Mart. They put less than 5% foreign in all their stores in China.

duh!

“It is the aim of good government to stimulate production, of bad government to encourage consumption.” – Jean Baptiste Say

With Wal*Mart having over 20,000 vendors in China….

Who is stimulating manufacturing in America?

Oct 25, 2012 12:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
madmilker wrote:

To the administrator of this site.

You had better check the FACTS in the comment that I posted before you take it upon yourself to not have the comment posted.

Good day!

Oct 25, 2012 12:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
madmilker wrote:

thank you!

Oct 25, 2012 12:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JLWR wrote:

The bankers and CEOs need to keep their filthy avarice greedy tongues and lobbying efforts to themselves. They are the entire cause of our economic demise and I don’t want their input or their selfish ideas. Their input needs and deserves to be drowned out by the workers of America. WE THE PEOPLE WILL DECIDE WHO GETS TAX CUTS AND WHO GETS TAXED MORE. Wall Street and CEO need to Shut the heck up!

Oct 25, 2012 1:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lloyd_L wrote:

The cynicism in this blog is breathtaking. It is certainly true that some of the large financial institutions played a huge role in our financial collapse but to lump all corporations into one group makes no sense. To dismiss what they have to just because you don’t like them makes even less sense.

For instance, the article says “The group said any fiscal plan must be bipartisan, tackle all areas of the budget and include tax reform. It also urged the government to reform and improve the efficiency of healthcare programs like Medicare and Medicaid.”

That sounds pretty logical. The U.S. Government is borrowing approximately 35% of everything it spends is simply unsustainable. One of the biggest holes of all is in Medicare and Medicaid where there are projected outlays of $733B vs. revenue of just $203B!

See Table S-5 at;
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/tables.pdf

Unfortunately, both Obama and Bush spent their time shuffling around who will pay for health care rather than reducing actual health care costs. Reducing health care costs is budget reform. It will also increase the disposable income of every family who has to pay for health care out of their pocket.

Here is an example. My wife had appendicitis. The laparoscopic surgery went perfectly and she was out of the hospital in less and 24 hours. The bill was over $24,000. Of that, the surgeon was only paid $850 but the hospital charged us over $16,000 in fees labeled only as “miscellaneous.”

Unfortunately, we can’t really shop around for health care because most hospitals and large medical groups won’t tell you how much their fees are. Forcing all medical providers to post their fees would be a good first step in bringing some competition to the medical field. If every doctor, medical group and hospital had to post their fees, then competition would bring down the cost of health care. Here is an example from the Surgery Center of Oklahoma;

http://surgerycenterok.com/pricing.php

If my hospital here in California had to compete with the Surgery Center of Oklahoma, then the cost of my wife’s appendectomy wouldn’t have been $24,000!

There’s another thing you may want to consider. Why is it that large corporations are sitting on so much cash upon which they get practically no interest? It was widely reported a year or so ago that Apple Computer had more cash on hand than the U.S. Government. Could it be that these corporations understand the seriousness of the fiscal cliff and are merely being prudent and want to have a healthy amount of cash on hand in the event that things get really bad. I’m not rich but we are certainly not spending a lot of money and are instead trying to build up our savings account to the extent that we can.

Oct 25, 2012 2:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mikemm wrote:

Maybe this will give the members of Congress who signed the Grover Norquist pledge the cover they need to break that pledge and toss Mr. Norquist out of the legislative process once and for all.

Anybody under the illusion that we can reduce our deficit by only cutting items in the budget is delusional. It will take increased revenues which will require some tax increases along with hard choices and balanced cuts. Depending on a growing economy or trickle down theory does not guarantee revenue results and even when it does work it will take time before we see any significant results in the form of tax revenue. We need real and immediate relief to start reducing our debt now.

Oct 25, 2012 2:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
thick wrote:

Ok what they’re requesting is the exact legislation that President Obama was pushing for in the summer of 2011. President Obama was unable to get that accomplished because our ideological extremists in Congress flat refused to be any part of any plan that involved increasing federal revenues by even a penny… Well hopefully our Congressional ideological extremists will listen to these CEOs because they definitely won’t listen to the President!

Oct 25, 2012 2:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Obama’s plan for the deficit: Tax “the rich” for an incremental $40B in revenue when he blew last years budget by $1,600B….is that what Bill Clinton was calling arithmetic? LOL

…that was a nervous laugh by the way, the kind of nervous laughter commensurate with knowing you have a POTUS with no plan nor the leadership to effect it if he had one…

Oct 25, 2012 3:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@gianthead…by architects of this economic disaster are you referring to Bill Clinton who signed the financial deregulation that allowed the crisis to transpire (GrammLeechBliley and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act)?

Oct 25, 2012 3:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

@JL4
“ the only way to bring jobs back to the U.S. is to stop them from sending jobs overseas. The way to do that is to offer them tax breaks for creating jobs HERE, not overseas.”

No, the only way to bring jobs back is to make America attractive for business investment in an organic manner. More big government policies like tax breaks for certain levels of employment, pay etc. is exactly the type of bone-headed government controls policies that will further deter business investment.

“The only way to balance our budget is through third grade math: Thoughtfully reduce spending and thoughtfully increase revenue.”

The CBO projects Obama’s tax the rich tax plan to yield $40B in incremental revenue while he blew last year’s budget alone by more than $1,600B – is that what you would deem to be thoughtful? Does that pass your third grade math test? Didn’t think so.

“It doesn’t make sense to “trim taxes” and then eliminate deductions. The only way to increase revenue that way is to eliminate far more deductions than taxes “trimmed”.”

Or you could get the economy growing at a healthy clip and reap revenue increases that way. Ya know, just like Mitt already so eloquently described…

Oct 25, 2012 3:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lloyd_L wrote:

@jaham wrote
“the only way to bring jobs back is to make America attractive for business investment in an organic manner. More big government policies like tax breaks for certain levels of employment, pay etc. is exactly the type of bone-headed government controls policies that will further deter business investment.”

I agree. More government regulations will only lead to more crony capitalism;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSgUENZ9O94

Oct 25, 2012 4:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Gordon2352 wrote:

Are you kidding me?

These people are the PROBLEM, not the SOLUTION!

The Guardian (UK) article is a bit more “factual” with what these people want.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/oct/25/top-ceos-tax-increases-spending-cuts-debt

For example, “Obama has proposed raising the marginal income-tax rates for the top 2% of taxpayers. None of the CEOs endorse that plan either, and have instead called for an overhaul of the tax code that would eliminate or reduce deductions, credits and loopholes.

According to the signatories, any plan has to “include comprehensive and pro-growth tax reform, which broadens the base, lowers rates, raises revenues and reduces the deficit” as well as limiting the growth spending in areas including healthcare.”

“The plan should be conducive to long-term economic growth, protect the vulnerable, include credible enforcement mechanisms to ensure that debt reduction is achieved and leave the next generation better.”

Gus Faucher, a senior macroeconomist at PNC Financial said the letter was unlikely to change the course of the debate before the election but in the long term he expected whoever is elected to be forced to look at both tax hikes and spending cuts.

“The big issue is how we pay for retiring babyboomers, and I don’t think as a society we have really faced up to that yet. Nothing will get done until after the election but it’s difficult to see a solution that only involved spending cuts,” he said.

————————————————

Notice all the “codewords” and statements that sound great, but in reality will totally destroy what is left of the US economy.

(1) They do not agree on a tax increase for the wealthy class.

(2) Instead they want an “overhaul of the tax code that would eliminate or reduce deductions, credits and loopholes”, which means eliminating deductions for the middle class like the mortgage deduction, health insurance premium deduction, and similar “loopholes” they themselves do not use.

(3) What they want is to “include comprehensive and pro-growth tax reform, which broadens the base, lowers rates, raises revenues and reduces the deficit” as well as limiting the growth spending in areas including healthcare”.

“Comprehensive and pro-growth tax reform” really means means lowering the tax rate for corporations to 15% where the capital gains tax rate is now so they can generate more profit for their stockholders.

In order to offset the massive shortfall in tax revenues when the wealthy refuse to pay more taxes and corporations are allowed to cut their taxes in half, they want to “increase revenues” by “broadening the tax base to include higher taxes for those who pay taxes now by eliminating tax breaks and for the middle class and include those who don’t, such as lower income groups.

Limit the growth in healthcare means eliminating the present employer-based system millions of people depend upon for healthcare, and preferably make it market-based so nobody except someone who does not need healthcare care can afford it. Thus causing millions of people to lose their homes due to uncontrollable healthcare costs.

I’m sure “entitlements” — i.e. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid — though not specifically mentioned qualify as “mechanisms to ensure that debt reduction is achieved and leave the next generation better.”

Apparently, they intend to “leave the next generation better” by wiping out babyboomers retirement plans. This will be done no matter that the Social Security Fund was “fixed” to accommodate the baby boomer generation decades ago, but the government could keep itself from “borrowing” the funds to use the baby boomer retirement funds for more immediate concerns like conducting decades of war against “our” enemies.

THAT is what the government won’t tell the baby boomers — their money has been gambled away and lost so there is no money left for them to retire on.

In fact, the US government is actually completely broke, and we are reduced to printing money to survive.

Good luck in trying to force them to make good on their commitments now. especially when the wealthy class has other ideas for “our” future.

Oct 25, 2012 4:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Gordon2352 wrote:

The Guardian article states, “The CEOs are stepping into a debate that has caused gridlock in Washington. At the end of the year, Bush-era tax cuts are set to expire and draconian spending cuts will be imposed unless a political solution is found. The so-called “fiscal cliff” could plunge the US back into recession, according to the Congressional Budget Office.”

If you want to know what the codewords “political solution” really mean, I suggest you start following the eurozone news.

THAT is our future beginning next year no matter who is elected president.

Oct 25, 2012 5:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lloyd_L wrote:

@gordon2352

I guess we are all free to interpret what was said in the article how we choose. However, when the article indicates that the group says “any fiscal plan must be bipartisan, tackle all areas of the budget and include tax reform,” I don’t see that as being code language for more tax breaks for the corporations and wealthy and more taxes for the middle class.

Consider this. The wealthiest 5% of taxpayers pay nearly 60% of the income taxes paid by individuals. Within that group, there are a few that pay either no tax or very little? Is that fair? What we need is a simplified tax code so that large corporations and the super wealthy can’t employ their armies of lawyers, accountants and lobbyists to avoid taxes.

You are also opposed to lowering the tax rate for corporations. That’s interesting because even President Obama says our corporate taxes are the highest in the world and need to be lowered so our companies can compete in a global economy. If companies can’t compete, they can’t create jobs.

Oct 25, 2012 5:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ConstFundie wrote:

@Lloyd_L,

So you would like to talk about “fair”? Is that because you are really concerned about social fairness in this Nation? The top 5% have 72% of ALL Financial wealth in this nation, and 63% of ALL Net Worth. Is that fair? Well You and Romney, and his puppeteer Murdoch, state hell yeah that is MORE than fair.

The bottom 80% have 5% of Financial wealth and 11% of ALL net worth. THE BOTTOM 80%!? The bottom 50% less than 1%, and probably less than 0.5%. Is that “fair” in your manual of fairness?
http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

People like Romney having several houses, car elevators, horded bank accounts across the world, criticizing the bottom 47% (having around 0.5% of the wealth of this nation) for not being able to pay income taxes (on top of all the other taxes they do pay) is ignorance, selfishness, and greed, bordering on Satanic.

Oct 25, 2012 6:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Harry079 wrote:

“U.S. CEOs call for deficit fix”

Well geez, now that we are near the end of life as we’ve known it these CEO’s are calling for a fix?

I didn’t hear any of these CEO’s complaining about the Fed & Treasury pumping hundreds of billions of dollars through the QE programs to keep the stock market from collapsing.

Oct 25, 2012 7:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ndacboss wrote:

If the CEOs don’t learn the difference between “debt” and “deficit”, the problem will never be fixed!!!!! Learn it.

Oct 25, 2012 8:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ndacboss wrote:

DumDum … corporations DO NOT pay taxes. never have, never will. Cannot. Cost of taxation must be built into the price of their product.

Oct 25, 2012 8:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
EthicsIntl wrote:

Goldman Sachs & more than 80 of America’s Corporate Gangsters looking for yet another Grand Ponzi Scheme to perpetrate on the American middle class. Put them all in cement shoes & drop them off at the Mariana Trench (the deepest part of the world’s oceans).

Oct 25, 2012 9:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ralphooo wrote:

“Such an openness to more taxation may seem antithetical… ”

No, it does not seem antithetical at all. Business leaders must above all be pragmatists. They are, as a group, extremely well compensated, and have no reason to fear moderately increased tax rates. It is only the Tea-Party-style demagogues who maintain the ludicrous view that an ideal government would levy no taxes at all. Their sole aim is destruction — of anyone, of anything.

Oct 25, 2012 9:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
northcentral wrote:

In this case, shoot the messenger, not the message. Both parties (and Wall Street) are responsible for this economic mess but Simpson/Bowles is a good plan. Every dollar in in revenue by the gov took in in 2012 went to pay the interest on the debt, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. We borrowed money to run the rest of the government and half that borrowing was from foreign countries. We have been losing over $1.0 Trillion deficit annually, have $16 Trillion in Debt, and a promised mortgage of Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, Public Employee/Military retirement and miscellaneous of -$55 Trillion. That means congress would have to have $55 Trillion in the bank at Treasury returns to meet these obligations. How much has congress saved? ZERO! We need a plan to attempt to get out of this mess or China will be in charge (our debt to China is about $1.5 Trillion).

Oct 25, 2012 11:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Quietman wrote:

Dare I hope that theses CEOs have realized that the Koch Brother funded Tea Party Congressman and Grover Norquist no-tax pledge signers have gone too far to the right. The approaching fiscal cliff has gotten their attention. I have no doubt that these CEOs still have their private agendas and do not have my middle class interest in mind, but at least they ask for a Congress that will negotiate a compromise budget. There is no quick 4 year fix to this one. Will Mitt with his magic underwear be able to turn promises into solutions, I don’t believe it.

Oct 26, 2012 2:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
jaham wrote:

Don’t worry CEO’s, Obama has already vowed to cut the budget deficit in half!

….wait, that was four years and an additional $6T in deficits ago?

Oct 26, 2012 11:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

CEO’s ask for deficit fix? While continuing to ask for stimulus dollars through people like Paul Ryan and paying 14% tax instead of 25% tax. Yeah, we’ll get right on that deficit fix. Idiots.

Oct 26, 2012 11:40am EDT  --  Report as abuse
BioStudies wrote:

“One element of that solution, which has been anathema to Republicans, is more revenue. While not expressly calling for higher taxes as such, the CEO group is endorsing the principle of a broader tax base that generates higher revenue.”

You are being very misleading here Reuters. That’s the Romney plan. Lower rates on a broader base. Not a tax raise. Get your facts straight.

Oct 26, 2012 4:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.