Deficit Talks Fail

[Neil]

Just for quick reference: 30% of US GDP is about $4.5 trillion.

That's a lot of deficit.  Obama should be hanged. [/uncriticallyacceptseverystatthatsomeonepostsontheinternet]

[fhdz]

It's sad the extent to which voodoo economics has ruined your country.

Tell me about it.

[The Minsky Moment]

Look at all those disastrous tax cuts.

What some people forget is that they were passed initially a temporary stimulus measure - hence the (disregarded) sunset.
People also forget (but the chart confirms) that the 08 stimulus bill pushed by the prior administration was around the same size as ARRA.

The problem is not the concept of stimulus in and of itself - the problem is the tendency of stimulus on both the tax and spending sides to become a new baseline rather than a temporary measure that is ramped back down when prosperity returns.

[Faeelin]

I'm not on board with Yi holding Obama responsible for 30% of the country's debt, but to take a position that might very well be his side, a statistic showing that Bush was an even wilder deficit spender than Obama doesn't support that Obama was very frugal.

I would say the statistics you cited support the reaction of "chutzpah".

I don't know. Yi is pretending that the GOP came into being in 2008, and plays no role in the creation of the Bush deficit. I acknowledge Obama's increased the deficit; he's also proposed cuts to spending and tax increases in order to fix that. The GOP response is... tax cuts, and spending cuts, with the promise of tax cuts leading to growth and the Laffer Singularity.

If Yi's point is that Obama increased spending, and therefore isn't serious about cutting the deficit, then the same is true of the GOP even moreso.

[garbon]

So while certainly it isn't good - isn't it not so bad that we're actually now facing more in automatic spending cuts for the next ten years than any of the proposed plans by either party?

[Admiral Yi]

Okay this is a bit more reasonable.  However, just because they were responsible for increasing the deficit by 30% doesn't mean that Obama's offer to the Republicans wasn't legitimate. It was and should have been accepted if the GOP congressmen really cared about the deficit. If they weren't afraid of the activists in the Tea Party they would have accepted.

A bit more reasonable than what Timmy?  The imaginary post in which I said Obama's offer wasn't legitimate?

[Neil]

Look at all those disastrous tax cuts.

What some people forget is that they were passed initially a temporary stimulus measure - hence the (disregarded) sunset.
People also forget (but the chart confirms) that the 08 stimulus bill pushed by the prior administration was around the same size as ARRA.

The problem is not the concept of stimulus in and of itself - the problem is the tendency of stimulus on both the tax and spending sides to become a new baseline rather than a temporary measure that is ramped back down when prosperity returns.

Well, when the tax cuts were passed, economic catastrophe was assured, so maybe they were just letting some people pile up some wealth to get them through the tough years ahead?

[fhdz]

What some people forget is that they were passed initially a temporary stimulus measure

It's no wonder that has been largely forgotten given how far they've overstayed their welcome.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't know. Yi is pretending that the GOP came into being in 2008, and plays no role in the creation of the Bush deficit. I acknowledge Obama's increased the deficit; he's also proposed cuts to spending and tax increases in order to fix that. The GOP response is... tax cuts, and spending cuts, with the promise of tax cuts leading to growth and the Laffer Singularity.

If Yi's point is that Obama increased spending, and therefore isn't serious about cutting the deficit, then the same is true of the GOP even moreso.

My point is that it's hypocritical for the Obama White House to acuse Congress of kicking the deficit can down the road when they've been running 10% deficits for three years, with no intention of tackling the issue until the 2010 elections made it an issue.

[Faeelin]

And the GOP had no intention of tackling them until they thought they could hit Obama with it. So what's the GOP proposal again?

[fhdz]

I'm sorry, I'm missing something here. Is anyone seriously suggesting that one side or the other during this mess has actually done due diligence?

[grumbler]

I feel that this super committee was an abdication of Congress's responsibilities. Congress should be doing what's needed, but instead they appoint a committee to an onery task. Worst of all for what they did legislate if this committee fails are the possibly draconian budget cuts that kick in at some point if nothing is resolved. Plus the possible downgrading of the US' credit rating, again.

The "draconian budget cuts' are designed to keep the "possible downgrading of the US' credit rating" at bay.  I can live with them.  In fact, I can live with Congress enacting no more laws (other than continuing resolutions) for a decade.  That will balance the budget by 2015, between special expenditures not re-enacted and tax cuts expiring.

Chaos for King!

[Faeelin]

I'm sorry, I'm missing something here. Is anyone seriously suggesting that one side or the other during this mess has actually done due diligence?

Yes, I think the Democrats have advanced actual, concrete proposals and the GOP has made it clear that they won't agree to any program with a tax hike.

[fhdz]

The "draconian budget cuts' are designed to keep the "possible downgrading of the US' credit rating" at bay.  I can live with them.  In fact, I can live with Congress enacting no more laws (other than continuing resolutions) for a decade.  That will balance the budget by 2015, between special expenditures not re-enacted and tax cuts expiring.

Chaos for King!

[fhdz]

Yes, I think the Democrats have advanced actual, concrete proposals and the GOP has made it clear that they won't agree to any program with a tax hike.

No, no - I mean during this WHOLE mess.