2016 elections - because it's never too early

[frunk]

I see it as the same as crime and immigration. The facts are positive. That doesn't mean you stop trying to find ways to cut crime, illegal immigration or to make the budget more efficient but it's a different political way of looking at it than the panic that you currently have. It's bad decisions that are made based on media ether not the actual situation.

The deficit in 2016 will be about the level it was in 1996. Worry about it as much as you did in the Clinton era.

I agree that panicking is entirely the wrong way of looking at it (do I need to repeat that the extreme deficit hawks are idiots?), but when the economy is improving/healthier is precisely when we should make sure that the deficit stays in control.  The projections for 2016 are based on the government and the economy not changing radically, which depends to a great extent on the budget (non-)negotiations for the next year and the results of the 2014 election.

[Sheilbh]

Who's projections are you using Shelf?

CBO.

I agree that panicking is entirely the wrong way of looking at it (do I need to repeat that the extreme deficit hawks are idiots?), but when the economy is improving/healthier is precisely when we should make sure that the deficit stays in control.

Yeah. But aside from the fevered imagination of the right (many Republicans think the deficit is still rising) there is no evidence that the debt and deficit won't be under control and improving. I don't dispute you should keep it under control - so maybe avoid tax cuts and wars for a while - but I think that's the context in which to approach the issue.

And as I say the real issue for the US budget is healthcare inflation - everything else pales in comparison to it.

The projections for 2016 are based on the government and the economy not changing radically, which depends to a great extent on the budget (non-)negotiations for the next year and the results of the 2014 election.

But I don't think that's true. The extent of Democrat exuberance is to stop the sequestration cuts and negotiate new ones. If there was an American Hollande, calling for the hiring of 100 000 new teachers, or a massive expansion of investment spending then there could be real concerns.

But the extent of the argument in the US is over the speed and composition of fiscal consolidation - either way the deficit and debt will fall.

The economic situation could change but you have to hope any surprise would be positive. Unless there's some massive self-inflicted problem with debt limit silliness.

[Admiral Yi]

The extent of Democrat exuberance is to stop the sequestration cuts and negotiate new ones.

I have seen absolutely nothing that would indicate Democrats are interested in negotiating alternate cuts.

[Sheilbh]

I have seen absolutely nothing that would indicate Democrats are interested in negotiating alternate cuts.

Obama's budget proposal had $1.2 trillion worth of cuts in place of sequestration

[Admiral Yi]

Obama's budget proposal had $1.2 trillion worth of cuts in place of sequestration

Interesting.  Can you name two of them for me?

[Sheilbh]

Obama's budget proposal had $1.2 trillion worth of cuts in place of sequestration

Interesting.  Can you name two of them for me?

How specifically? What would you consider a real cut because this could go down the rabbit hole

[Admiral Yi]

Negotiable.

How specific are the cuts in the proposal?

The last thing I heard on the subject was a White House flunky saying we could cut farm aid by $5 billion and <mumble mumble change the subject gotta go>.

[Sheilbh]

They proposed $37 billion cuts in farm subsidies. The biggest chunk was around $400 billion from Medicare.

Edit: But the proposals are quite specific so they say which bit of Medicare they tinker with to get that $8 billion saving etc.

See here:
http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/politics/president-obamas-2014-budget-proposal/94/

[Admiral Yi]

$40 billion a year from Medicare, at a time when Obamacare significantly ramps up Medicare eligibility?

[sbr]

Fraud and waste. 

[frunk]

The economic situation could change but you have to hope any surprise would be positive. Unless there's some massive self-inflicted problem with debt limit silliness.

Hope is nice, but have you not been paying attention to Congress the past 3 years?  I get the feeling that the average congressman isn't that bright.

[Admiral Yi]

Your link frightens and confuses me.

[Sheilbh]

Hope is nice, but have you not been paying attention to Congress the past 3 years?  I get the feeling that the average congressman isn't that bright.

I think hope's a part of it. There's loads of misplaced miserabilism about now - some of it's fair (Europe ). But generally there's lots of reasons to be optimistic and to nick a phrase 'most of our people have never had it so good'.

[Maximus]

Why should she be balanced?

Because that's a requirement for making solid decisions, which is a legislator's primary job.

[Sheilbh]

Because that's a requirement for making solid decisions, which is a legislator's primary job.

No it's not. Hearing both sides of the argument is, maybe, a requirement. But Nye Bevan doesn't have to be balanced when he's making the NHS, Paul Ryan doesn't need to be balanced when he's advocating balancing the budget solely through spending cuts.

I would point out that I think currently the US has probably gone through the most extremely unbalanced fiscal consolidation ever. The amount of revenues is minimal compared to the spending cuts.