Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pa28

(6,145 posts)
6. We had our chance to balance the budget without austerity.
Thu Oct 9, 2014, 11:54 AM
Oct 2014

Anybody remember the so called "fiscal cliff"? The combination of military spending reductions and tax cut expirations which were supposed to result in scary scary things happening? Well, we went over the cliff and nothing happened.

Nothing except a balanced budget that is. A bipartisan deal extended most of the tax cuts and restored military spending but under that particular set of laws we would have had a balanced budget or damn close to it with 4% growth by 2015.

We're coming up on 2015 now and the economy is currently churning along with a 4.6% rate of growth.

So, just to sum it up. The 2012 deficit scolds and hysterics from both parties actually had a balanced budget in their grasp but I'm left to believe that's not what they really wanted. What they really wanted was to cut Social Security, Medicare, food stamps and anything else that smacked of social benefit to ordinary Americans.

When they talk about deficit reduction austerity is exactly what they really mean.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Are you talking about the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005? n/t JustAnotherGen Oct 2014 #1
Nothing in particular. MannyGoldstein Oct 2014 #4
Already do! K&R 2naSalit Oct 2014 #2
there are two main components; austerity is one; growing economy is the other unblock Oct 2014 #3
A third component is revenue. nt kelliekat44 Oct 2014 #20
K&R liberal_at_heart Oct 2014 #5
We had our chance to balance the budget without austerity. pa28 Oct 2014 #6
It's a way for republicans to get what they want and for democrats to be blameless in liberal_at_heart Oct 2014 #7
Funny how WE always have to compromise. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #10
Yep you got it. zeemike Oct 2014 #19
The1% should be happy that that they didn't get cuts to SS, Medicare, Medicaid and Food Stamps Dustlawyer Oct 2014 #12
whenever we're threatened with a Peace Dividend, a new war just happens to pop up MisterP Oct 2014 #13
Yes, exactly. rustbeltvoice Oct 2014 #8
Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good (TM) FlatStanley Oct 2014 #11
"Austerity" is supposed to include tax hikes but they only use the word for budget cuts. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #9
We don't need 'deficit reduction'. It is merely an excuse to falsely tie SS to a deficit it COULD sabrina 1 Oct 2014 #14
I think the Democratic National Platform includes "reducing the deficit". Just sayin" rhett o rick Oct 2014 #15
No they aren't the same thing. Gore1FL Oct 2014 #16
But we always seem to find the money to fight another war n/t BuelahWitch Oct 2014 #17
du rec. xchrom Oct 2014 #18
Why not do like the opposition and just claim victory??? That's why Dems lose so much. nt kelliekat44 Oct 2014 #21
When I read "deficit reduction", I think something else hvn_nbr_2 Oct 2014 #22
I actually look at the context of whatever it is being discussed. TampaAnimusVortex Oct 2014 #23
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»When you read "defic...»Reply #6