Craig Gurian

More political reporters are either unable or unwilling to harness the cognitive and analytic effort involved in grasping basic evidentiary principles. But figuring out what impact is more likely than not to flow from a tax cut or from switching Medicare to a voucher system really isn't so hard.

The current system clearly hasn't been so good for those to whom the benefits were supposed to trickle down. But the U.S. remains a mighty economic force, one that could push back effectively if it wished to, and cross-national cooperation could yield a mutual defense pact to protect countries from having to compete in a race to the bottom.

Having become disoriented in the fog of Corporate Uncertainty, I was trying to find my way when, suddenly, over the Fiscal Cliff I went. I plunged straight down — deeper and deeper into the abyss. I thought all was lost. But then I saw the Grand Bargain waiting for me, beckoning to me. For a moment, I rejoiced.

The Medicaid expansion portion of the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Affordable Care Act was most fundamentally a decision to reorder the relationship between the federal government and the states, a decision to subordinate the idea of nationhood to judge-made deference-to-states theory. Voters, we were told, were not savvy enough to figure out the respective roles of federal and state officials and apportion credit or blame accordingly.

A recent CBO report on the long-term budget outlook has reheated deficit hysteria. But the points of fiscal stress the CBO highlighted were misleading, its alternative budget scenarios lacked range or nuance, and its treatment of "excess" growth in health care costs cavalier.

An outstanding reporter unaccountably prescribes a one-sided regimen of dispensing with annual physical examinations and cutting back on routine testing of both invasive and non-invasive testing, all without appreciating the potential costs to patients. Teaching better judgment? Yes. Minimizing data and communication? No.

Of all the fantasies indulged in by a society speeding toward self-destruction, none is as consequential as the idea that continuing growth has a happy-ever-after ending. But even if ever-increasing population were survivable, is it really desirable? Can't we figure out any adaptations to enable an aging society to be economically and socially robust?

An NYT piece suggests that unprecedented tax hikes for all Americans may be coming in January. In fact, what we have is basically a rerun of 2010. The central question once again: will President Obama stand up to the GOP and allow tax rates on the wealthiest Americans to return, as scheduled, to their Clinton-era levels?