improve or fiscal situation. instead we have a plan with very bim reform a lot of cuts and adds to our debt already at record levels. by our estimateses even after accounting for this plan first will add about $1 trillion more to the national debt at a time we should be bringing it down. if you get rid of all those gimmicks, add in another half trillion. we re talking about a massive amount of borrowing to finance this tax cut, and that means that it s less pro growth than it otherwise would have been which is a real lost opportunity. stan, you and i have probably known each other since we both had hair. i used to think there were deficit hawks, conservatives who didn t let me see stan. can we put stan up while i m talking to him. there used to be deficit hawks and now i ve learned that there are only deficit hawks if the deficit is caused by spending. if it s triggered by tax cuts, it s not such a bad thing. to be honest, republicans
discussion to a panel that i ve assembled for this great discussion. stan calllaenedor, and washingt editor at large of the atlantic, and committee for responsible budget, head of the non-partisan movement campaign to fix the debt and policy research a member of economics 21, an organization that focuses on budget tax and economic policy. great team to discuss this. let me start with you, ryan. do you know people prepared to come forward and make an argument why the carried interest loophole continues to be part of this tax cut? i wasn t part of the discussion on be this bill. i do know that there is definitely a case for doing something on it when the optics look pretty bad, when a hedge fund manager, for instance, is paying a lower rate than a laborer. at the same time, i think it s a