Of Course the Deficit is High!

[rucky]

Job losses of over 2 million mean that many less people are paying taxes.

It also means that that many more families require government assistance.

This is why you can't run government like a business:

In business, when times are bad, supply goes up and demand goes down. In government, when times are bad, supply goes down and demand goes up. We could've contiued our Clinton surplus, but Bush quickly squandered every penny of our "rainy day fund" and more. Now it's pouring.

The time to make budget cuts is when the economy is good - then you have reserves to get us through the tough cycles, when demand for government services is up. I don't see how anyone in good conscience can call for cuts to social services at a time like this, and overlook all the unnecessary spending that drained our surplus and got us in the situation we're in today.

[Statistical]

1. The problem isn't the deficit the problem is the debt and the long term projection.

$1.6T deficit not good but understandable.

Current debt $11T.
Projection through 2019 = +$9T MORE DEBT!

That includes very optimistic projections like ending war in Iraq and economy recovering Q3-2009.

Total National Debt by 2019 will be >$20T. ($11T today +9T projected over next decade).
So whats $20T?

It is more than 130% of GDP today and likely more than 100% GDP in 2019.
Another way to look at it is interest. $20T @ 5% = $1T in interest.
Total US revenue is $2.6T right now. Interest in 2019 would be $1T (or about 40% of every dollar coming in).

Starting to see the problem? The question isn't raising taxes or cutting spending..... it is doing both and not by token amounts. Something like a 5% boost in taxes, a 1% cut in spending across the board and targeted cuts up to 10% in some areas won't resolve the issue but will at slow the bleeding.


The last stage of every empire collapse is money flows out of the empire faster than it flows in. Happened in British Empire, happened in Rome, happened in Byazntine Empire and it is happening circa 2000-2019 in the American Empire.

[Mari333]

2. cut the defense spending by 2/3 and stop both occupations and it might start recovering nt

[earthside]

3. Bingo!

The federal government never had to go so deeply into debt if there had been realistic cuts in the trillion dollars spend every year on the military (Pentagon, VA, Energy Dept, CIA, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc).

If only the folks in Washington would get real ... for instance, we simply cannot afford 64 military installation in Italy anymore.

But this huge national government debt is unsustainable -- and it will be our undoing, probably sooner rather than later.

[AndyA]

4. The important point is this:

Bush is responsible for much of the debt to begin with. He started a war based on lies that didn't need to be fought, ignoring the people responsible for 9/11 in the meantime.

We would have been in a much better position to fight this economic downturn if we hadn't had the war debt to start with.

Of course, had the person who received the most votes for President been put into office back in 2001, we probably wouldn't be where we are now at all, but that's another topic. :(

[endless october]

5. bring the military home and end the drug war.

that should eliminate the deficit. plus, you could probably put a 20 cent tax on a pack of joints and fund single payer health care.

[Igel]

6. It's high.

But doesn't need to be that high.

In some cases the expenditures more than paid for themselves; in others, not, and swelled the deficit unnecessarily. The deficit going forward is unsustainable, but most of what's planned to be reduced is stuff that should not have been included in the budget projections in the first place.

As for recessions causing a reduction in income taxes, leading to a deficit (or increased deficit), it's an excuse I hear widely now. It's true, of course. But it's not an excuse I heard so much, or hear so much, about the deficit 8 years ago. It was also true then. But politics make some things unpalatable and unutterable.

The deficit last year was increased by a stimulus package, as well, but people focused on the size of the deficit, not (a) that it was probably partially caused by a recession, (b) that it was partially caused by an anti-recession stimulus bill, (c) that it was due not just to administration requests for increased military spending but also increases on a wide variety of purposes, not always at the administration's request. (Yes, I am one of those who doesn't hold Obama uniquely responsible for the current budget deficits, even those portions bearing his signature, any more than I hold prior presidents responsible for what a dem or repub House/Senate did.)