• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who Has the Courage to Get Our Budget in Order?

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,343
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Here is some straight talk about what we need to do to get our budget in order. Neither GWB nor BHO provided leadership in this area.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...a82-11e5-93b7-5eddc056ad8a_story.html?hpid=z3


A recent Congressional Budget Office report, “The 2015 Long-Term Budget Outlook,” reminds us that the federal government is slowly becoming an agency for taking care of the elderly. Almost everything else is being crowded out. We ignored that during the Obama presidency, and now it seems that the fledgling presidential campaign may do likewise. Hillary Clinton and other Democrats plug fairer economic growth. Jeb Bush and other Republicans are more forthcoming (they talk about raising Social Security’s eligibility age) but concentrate their rhetoric on creating faster economic growth.
Government’s central reality has gone missing. There’s a bipartisan triumph of political expedience over professed beliefs. Liberals shrink many domestic programs, because they won’t acknowledge that unchecked spending on the elderly is partially financed by curbing other activities — from food stamps to highway repairs. Conservatives weaken defense, because they won’t concede that, even with cuts to domestic spending (including the elderly), an adequate military cannot be financed without additional taxes. . . .
 

We are diametrically opposed on this matter. I think the Military Offense budget is the cause of all the Nation's serious problems.
 
Liberals shrink many domestic programs, because they won’t acknowledge that unchecked spending on the elderly is partially financed by curbing other activities — from food stamps to highway repairs.
Click to expand...

This isn't true at all. Spending on one program is completely unrelated to spending (or lack thereof) on another.


What's left is as much as the government is interested in spending on "the rest".

Either the rest of government will shrink dramatically, or Congress will expand government spending sharply. The latter, of course, would require higher taxes or bigger deficits.
Click to expand...

He at least gets this right.

But budget deficits are not the problem. They are simply the consequences of the problem, which is that the combination of an aging society and expensive health care threatens many vital government functions.
Click to expand...

This is certainly true. Healthcare expenses are a big problem. ACA helped somewhat but not nearly enough.

The young are being forced to subsidize the old through higher taxes and reduced public services.
Click to expand...

He contradicts himself here. Why can't the source of funding be larger deficits and not just these two things, as he said a couple sentences ago?

The proper response is to spread the pain.
Click to expand...

No, the proper response is to expand the deficits and grow the national debt.
 

Do you see a ceiling where debt growth should stop?
 

I do.

first act is gut the department of education. it isn't needed. states can handle their own education. the department would be reduced to nothing more than a few people to ensure
the money saved was going to education.

next is to changed SS. it is not longer a Ponzi scheme.
what you pay into SS is yours. the government will pay a flat interest rate on the account.
if you are 55 or older there is not enough time to correct the problem so you will stay on the current system.

next total redo of the tax system making it easier and simplier to read.
 

Fair enough.
 
Jack Hays said:
We'll have to disagree.
Click to expand...

That we will. Certainly, if you cannot point to real economic damage that can be logically blamed on federal deficits. Because we all know that unemployment is damaging.
 

Yes, I can agree that you would want the tax system to be easier and 'simplier' to read. :doh

Snarky remarks aside, do you understand the economic importance of standardization in industry and business? It's crucial - standardization is one of the keys to success, in everything from 8.5x11 paper to the size of gas pump nozzles to limits on what can be carried on aircraft. Anyone in the least familiar with business should understand this instinctively.

Likewise, what do you think would happen if all fifty states set their own educational standards? "I'm sorry, Mr. Jones, but we in Kansas don't accept high-school diplomas from Montana - we disagree with the curriculum taught therein." Anyone who's ever experienced having to retake college courses because the new college you're going to doesn't recognize the courses you've already taken should understand precisely what I mean.

This is why we have NATIONAL standards, to make it easier for the graduates of schools in any particular state to be more readily accepted in other states.
 
JohnfrmClevelan said:
That we will. Certainly, if you cannot point to real economic damage that can be logically blamed on federal deficits. Because we all know that unemployment is damaging.
Click to expand...

By the time debt/deficits produce high inflation the damage has already been done. As for unemployment, I believe most economists consider 4% unemployment optimal.
 

You don't need a whole department that consumes 50b+ dollars in waste a year to do that. as an aside that is just waste.
you need about 10 people maybe 15.

the fact is there is government waste and the department of education is a waste of space.
the commerce clause prevents what you say from happening anyway.

that is the difference you think it takes a whole department and billions and billions of dollars. it doesn't.
yes the states know better how to educate their populace than Washington does.
 
ludin said:
You don't need a whole department that consumes 50b+ dollars in waste a year to do that. as an aside that is just waste.
you need about 10 people maybe 15.
Click to expand...

I suggest you go find out what the DOE does.

the fact is there is government waste and the department of education is a waste of space.
the commerce clause prevents what you say from happening anyway.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's government waste - always has been, always will be. Thing is, ALL sizable organizations - government, public, private, business, religious, sports, whatever - have waste and fraud and abuse. Why do ALL sizable organizations have waste? Because they're full of HUMANS. What's more important to remember is that just because there is waste doesn't mean that organization has to go.

It's sorta like having a car: when you operate any car, not all the gas is used - some of it's wasted. Same goes for the oil. But just because there's some waste doesn't mean it's a bad car.

So it goes with governments and all other human organizations - just because there is waste doesn't make it bad. What's important is to MINIMIZE the waste that there is.

that is the difference you think it takes a whole department and billions and billions of dollars. it doesn't.
yes the states know better how to educate their populace than Washington does.
Click to expand...

Mm-hmm, and so Texas and MS and several other states can get rid of the teaching of evolution and just teach creationism. What a wonderful example of how states know better than the feds....
 
Jack Hays said:
By the time debt/deficits produce high inflation the damage has already been done.
Click to expand...

What damage, and to who? And wouldn't a freeze on government deficit spending nearly instantly stop this damage that you speak of?

And do you believe that this damage is more damaging than people who desire to work not being able to find work?

As for unemployment, I believe most economists consider 4% unemployment optimal.
Click to expand...

Yea, most economist consider the full employment rate to be around 4-5% unemployment, although in some countries, like Japan, that would still be considered high unemployment. I guess it's a cultural difference.
 
imagep said:
What damage, and to who? And wouldn't a freeze on government deficit spending nearly instantly stop this damage that you speak of?

And do you believe that this damage is more damaging than people who desire to work not being able to find work?
Click to expand...

No, I don't think a freeze on deficit spending would do anything except sow panic. Neither inflation nor unemployment is desirable, but the former causes more general problems.


  1. [h=3]Costs of Inflation | Economics Help[/h]www.economicshelp.org › ... › Economic Essays on Inflation


  2. When inflation is high people are uncertain what to spend their money on. Also, when inflation is high firms may be less willing to invest because they are uncertain about future profits and costs. This uncertainty and confusion can lead to lower rates of economic growth over the long term.


  3. [h=3]The Costs of Inflation - Boundless[/h]www.boundless.com › ... › Defining, Measuring, and Assessing Inflation



  4. In economics, a menu cost is the cost to a firm resulting from changing its prices. With high inflation, firms must change their prices often in order to keep up with ...


  5. [h=3]Economic Costs of Inflation | Economy Watch[/h]www.economywatch.com/inflation/economic-costs.html



    The Economic Costs of Inflation deal with and measures the marginal costs of ... Disorder and improbability: With high inflation, the inhabitants of a country ...


 

For the unemployed, inflation doesn't really make a difference. It doesn't really matter what something costs, if ya aint got no money.

For the employed, inflation doesn't really matter either because when we have inflation, one of the things that goes up is wages.

The only people that inflation causes signficant damage to are those who hold large amount of cash. But that's their choice, no one forces another to make poor financial decisions. We all know that inflation exists, deal with it.

Anyhow, in theory inflation wouldn't be caused by government deficit spending util we got to the full employment level (whatever that is). So all a government has to do is to have a full employment policy, meaning that it will do whatever is needed to keep employment at around X%, and any inflation would be minimal.

If government deficit spending by itself was inflationary, then in 2009 we should have had record inflation. We didn't. Without looking it up, I seem to remember a couple or three negative inflationary quarters during that fiscal year.

Anytime that a theory is found to not match actual historic reality, it's time to seek a theory that fits the evidence better.
 
Last edited:

I disagree, and I think the links I provided support my view.
 

Wait... I thought Obama was trying to get some death panels in place.
 
JohnfrmClevelan said:
That we will. Certainly, if you cannot point to real economic damage that can be logically blamed on federal deficits. Because we all know that unemployment is damaging.
Click to expand...


Wow......Greece, Spain, Venezuela, Japan, Argentina...Lol.

Really ? What's its called when your'e so ideological loyal you ignore reality ?
 
What Samuelson is doing is blaming seniors for deficits. Of course, the major cause of our debt is tax-cuts that turned surpluses into deficits. Had we just not lowered taxes in the 2000s, the budget would balanced and the debt paid. We'd have much more had we kept the tax-rates that we had under Reagan.
 
Mass Delusion among Greece

Good article. Mass delusion indeed. Syrzia's solution for the consequence of years of unsustainable deficit spending is for Greece to keep spending.

And on Public Sector jobs no less.

It would appear that the longer a Nation suffers economically, the more receptive their citizens are to destructive fringe concepts.

A large percentage of Syrzia's supporters are avowed Marxist.

In America Bernie Sanders is gaining steam. Desperation breeds envy and hatred and apparently naivete and unfortunately there are Politicians who will use that to gain power.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…