Bush seeks $1 trillion debt boost!!

Dissipate

Diamond Member
Jan 17, 2004
6,815
0
0
Bush seeks $1 trillion debt boost


By Patrice Hill
THE WASHINGTON TIMES

President Bush, saying the economic recovery is firmly in place, yesterday proposed adding $1 trillion to the national debt to fund the cost of shifting to a partially privatized Social Security system.
The massive increase in debt, coming on top of a $7 trillion national debt that is growing by about $500 billion a year, adds controversy to what was already promising to be a difficult reform to get enacted.
The debt increase is acknowledged in the 2004 Economic Report of the President, which was penned by the White House Council of Economic Advisers and released yesterday.
The Social Security privatization plan has largely disappeared from Mr. Bush's speeches and budget blueprints, although it was a major campaign platform in the 2000 election. It was judged to be politically palatable at the time because it would draw on some of the government's large projected surpluses to finance transition costs from the current government-funded pension system.
But those surplus projections have disappeared and been replaced by record federal deficits, and Mr. Bush had not previously revealed how he would fund the plan, which would enable workers to put some of their Social Security contributions into private accounts that are invested in stocks and other securities.
Because Social Security relies on current payroll taxes to fund today's retirees, the question has been how to divert money to private accounts and still meet the pension program's obligations.
The economic report for the first time tentatively provides the answer ? with borrowing ? as well as a rationale for the decision that asserts that adding the cost of privatizing the program to the national debt would have little detrimental effect on the economy or workers.
"Since the budget surpluses forecasted a few years ago have not materialized, critics argue that adding personal retirement accounts to Social Security is impossible or impractical," it says.
"In reality, the need to add resources to the Social Security system is no less pressing now that the surpluses have disappeared; indeed, it may be even more so."
The upbeat assessment on whether another $1 trillion in government debt will harm the economy reflects the report's overall bullish tone on the economy and the consequences of debt.
Maintaining that the economy is in the midst of a "full-fledged recovery," the report credits Mr. Bush's tax cuts as well as the Federal Reserve's lenient interest-rate policies.
The economic advisers forecast that the elixir of tax cuts and low interest rates will help to generate 2.6 million new jobs in 2004. They also predict the economy will grow by 4 percent this year.
Democrats immediately jumped on the jobs forecast, pointing out that the economy came nowhere near adding the 1.7 million jobs the administration forecast last year as a result of the tax cuts. Instead, the economy lost 53,000 jobs in 2003.
"The Bush economic team is infected with a bad case of wishful thinking," said House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat. "But wishful thinking does not pay the mortgage, and sunny predictions do not feed the kids."
While forecasting a robust economy going forward, the White House report also casts a glance backward and offers some historical revisions as well as lessons learned from the 2001 recession and jobless recovery that followed.
It offers an economic justification for the White House's oft-asserted belief that the recession actually began at the end of 2000 during the final months of the Clinton administration ? meaning Mr. Bush "inherited" the downturn.
The White House is not the arbiter of when recessions begin and end. That task is given to a private think tank, the National Bureau of Economic Research in Boston. The group has already stated that the recession began in March 2001 and ended in November of the same year.
But after revised economic data two months ago showed the economy contracted in the summer quarter of 2000, several members of the Boston recession-dating panel said they were considering whether the new evidence shows the recession began sooner.
The White House report says that by October 2000, it was clear that "economic activity had slowed sharply or even begun to decline ... including the stock market, business investment, and initial unemployment claims."
Culling lessons from the hard experience of the recession, the report points out that it "can take time to resolve" structural problems like the "capital overhang" created by the late 1990s boom in technology and the stock market. The bust in those sectors in 2000 is largely blamed for bringing on the recession.
The long process of recovering from the tech bust accounts in part for the painfully slow recovery. Also, "uncertainties" created by the Iraq war, a slew of corporate scandals and the September 11 attacks took time to dissipate, and the economy could not recover until they did, the report said.
But the recession proved to be shorter and milder than usual, thanks to the Fed's aggressive interest-rate cuts and the timeliness of the Bush tax cuts, it said.


Linked

All I can say is WOW. Just WOW. A TRILLION dollar increase in the national debt?! I believe this is in addition to the half trillion dollar deficit that is already projected for 2004. I'm actually not sure what to make of this, privatizing social security would be a great thing, but a trillion dollars of debt? There has got to be a better way. Say it ain't so!
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
That's what happens when people think there is some "trust-fund" to draw funds from.

I don't support this at all. SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,337
136
Like his pappy, GW will not be happy until he has bankrupted the US. I hate Democrats, but he needs to go. Maybe we can find some economic stability with a Democratic President and a Republican Congress. It worked before.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
Originally posted by: Czar
and then he is going to cut down the national debt by 50%?

Maybe what he adds to it
rolleye.gif
 

glugglug

Diamond Member
Jun 9, 2002
5,340
1
81
It needs to go up to have more room to go down, since we know he is incapable of an increase of less than $500,000,000,000 a year.
 

ITJunkie

Platinum Member
Apr 17, 2003
2,512
0
76
www.techange.com
Originally posted by: Vic
Like his pappy, GW will not be happy until he has bankrupted the US. I hate Democrats, but he needs to go. Maybe we can find some economic stability with a Democratic President and a Republican Congress. It worked before.

Things sure seem to lean that way don't they...historically speaking.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
That's what happens when people think there is some "trust-fund" to draw funds from.

I don't support this at all. SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG


There certainly is a trust fund, the only question is can it be successfully stolen and used for other purposes than what it was collected for.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
That's what happens when people think there is some "trust-fund" to draw funds from.

I don't support this at all. SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG


There certainly is a trust fund, the only question is can it be successfully stolen and used for other purposes than what it was collected for.

Only in semantic terms.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
"Only in semantic terms. "

Do you mean the existence of the trust fund ? If so the bonds are real and are earning interest everyday.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
I don't like this either :( We *need* drastic reform.

Funny thing is, this is tiddlywinks next to Medicare :)
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: alchemize
I don't like this either :( We *need* drastic reform.

Funny thing is, this is tiddlywinks next to Medicare :)

There are about 40 trillion in IOUs for SS/medicare. I only wish a trillion would fix it.
 

Spencer278

Diamond Member
Oct 11, 2002
3,637
0
0
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
That's what happens when people think there is some "trust-fund" to draw funds from.

I don't support this at all. SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG


There certainly is a trust fund, the only question is can it be successfully stolen and used for other purposes than what it was collected for.


The funds where already stolen.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Spencer278
Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
That's what happens when people think there is some "trust-fund" to draw funds from.

I don't support this at all. SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG


There certainly is a trust fund, the only question is can it be successfully stolen and used for other purposes than what it was collected for.


The funds where already stolen.

I guess he thinks the general fund is a trust fund.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Agreed!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



seconded!

Do we have quorum?
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: Vic
Like his pappy, GW will not be happy until he has bankrupted the US. I hate Democrats, but he needs to go. Maybe we can find some economic stability with a Democratic President and a Republican Congress. It worked before.

While I agree that GW Bush has been a huge failure as a fiscal conservative, I don't believe for a second that Kerry, or any other Democrat, is going to be better (and may be even worse). The National Taxpayers' Union did a study of the proposed spending plans of the Democratic candidates and even taking into account their repeal of the Bush tax cuts, the NTU found that Kerry & Co. would have even higher budget deficits than Bush. Much as I'm mad at Bush for rampant deficit spending, I fear going with a Dem is just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. Ultimately, the blame has to lie with voters and their refusal to punish deficit spending.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: MonkeyK

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
SS needs better reform than just private accounts.

CkG
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Agreed!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



seconded!

Do we have quorum?

I'm sure we do. Now the problem is the details;)

CkG