Why Republicans refuse to trade immediate tax hikes for long term spending cuts

[bfdd]

"Would you call that a spending problem?"

I'd call it lets not have another Great Depression plan. And his plan wasn't substantially different than the Republican plan.

And it worked. It's arguable that the mistake was not spending enough, or fast enough.

lol "worked", yeah about as good as putting a bandaid on an axe wound.

 

[Jhhnn]

lol "worked", yeah about as good as putting a bandaid on an axe wound.

So, uhh, you're arguing for a bigger bandage, major surgery, or just letting the victim die?

Maybe the victim needs a blood transfusion from the guy who was swinging the "deregulated banking in the global economy ownership society" axe around in the first place...

 

[bfdd]

So, uhh, you're arguing for a bigger bandage, major surgery, or just letting the victim die?

Maybe the victim needs a blood transfusion from the guy who was swinging the "deregulated banking in the global economy ownership society" axe around in the first place...

Because taking their money will fix EVERYTHING right? No it won't. We need to "die" so we can be reborn. Our current system is fucked and it isn't going to get fixed as long as the majority of us are bickering over Red vs Blue. Then add to the fact the moment we stop bitching about Red vs Blue we're done anyways because we'll probably revolt against our "leaders" for all the bullshit they have pulled and need to be "reborn" anyways. There really isn't any outcome in this in which everything is sunshine and rainbows. It's just not possible.

Do you disagree with me? If so I'd like you to start rattling off all the evidence you have against what I'm saying. We did what we were told would "fix" things and things are progressively getting worse and now we have even more debt. The problems we need to fix will not be fixed by either the Republicans or Democrats who benefit from the current shitstorm of a political system.

 

[dca221]

Temporary being the key term, but with Obama it is NOT temporary as you so clearly point out.

We had a bad recession in 1982-3 and spending jumped to 23.5% of GDP and then it declined and then the 1992/3 recession came and spending jumped up again and then declined. In both cases post recession spending was lower than pre-recession.

And then Bush came along and when we had a recession and spending went up and it came down, but never below its pre-recession levels and now we are seeing the same thing with Obama. Spending has gone up and will go down, but it will never get to its 2008 level.

Also, mandatory is NOT mandatory. We just call it that in order to avoid dealing with it. But we will have to cut or control mandatory or else it will destroy the economy in the next 20-30 years.

What we are doing now is small stuff compared to what we should be doing. We are arguing over a $100 cable bill while ignoring the car that is about to fall apart, the leak in the roof and the new furnace we need before winter or else we'll freeze to death. But hey! If we cut back HBO then we can survive for a few more months...

uh huh. I see that you are now arguing against entitlements... which is fine.

I am still waiting for you to show us what spending Obama drove, you know, the socialist government takeover that he is leading? the $800BN Obama spending binge?

I showed you multiple times longer term spending increase is driven by entitlements and interest payments.

So, if you want to argue "spending has to come down", that's fine and it's a different argument. I'd rather increase the taxes some to close the deficit, but that's just me, and the majority of the country who'd like to keep their social security and medicare benefits.

But if you want to argue "Obama's $800BN spending binge", you need to do better, Professor

 

[CLite]

@dca221

Very nice research. I've always been under the impression that the continuing mounting debt has been due to decades of the status quo in terms of locked in contractual entitlements. People like to blame Bush and Obama, but it's clear that the policies of all the past presidents back to Reagan (and before) and also the congresses are contributing to the mess we are in. Unfortunately, people are all too happy to bitch about partisan politics than to confront their own faults and engage in discussions to move the country forward.

Anyways, my thought on this topic is that we need to identify ways to start slowing down the accruing contractual liabilities for government workers and also pursue tax hikes for top earners. I personally thought that Obama's proposal for eliminating some of the subsidies and tax loopholes was quite a smart way to get around a full fledged tax increase. Simplifying the tax code is always a good thing, one step at a time.

 

[Jhhnn]

@dca221

Very nice research. I've always been under the impression that the continuing mounting debt has been due to decades of the status quo in terms of locked in contractual entitlements. People like to blame Bush and Obama, but it's clear that the policies of all the past presidents back to Reagan (and before) and also the congresses are contributing to the mess we are in. Unfortunately, people are all too happy to bitch about partisan politics than to confront their own faults and engage in discussions to move the country forward.

Anyways, my thought on this topic is that we need to identify ways to start slowing down the accruing contractual liabilities for government workers and also pursue tax hikes for top earners. I personally thought that Obama's proposal for eliminating some of the subsidies and tax loopholes was quite a smart way to get around a full fledged tax increase. Simplifying the tax code is always a good thing, one step at a time.

Just stop it- stop making sense. The leadership of the Right needs for their flock to have enemies and whipping boys to obfuscate the truth, the truth that supporting and condoning greed at the top has put us where we are today.

 

[ProfJohn]

uh huh. I see that you are now arguing against entitlements... which is fine.

I am still waiting for you to show us what spending Obama drove, you know, the socialist government takeover that he is leading? the $800BN Obama spending binge?

I showed you multiple times longer term spending increase is driven by entitlements and interest payments.

So, if you want to argue "spending has to come down", that's fine and it's a different argument. I'd rather increase the taxes some to close the deficit, but that's just me, and the majority of the country who'd like to keep their social security and medicare benefits.

But if you want to argue "Obama's $800BN spending binge", you need to do better, Professor

The problem is that it is impossible to find where the extra spending is going from those high level charts.

For example "Human resources":
2007 = $1.7t t
2008 = $1.89 t
2009 = $2.15 t
2010 = $2.38 t
2011 = $2.50 t

Spending in that category has gone up by $800 billion in 5 years (that increase is more than our defense spending)
Are you suggesting that this entire growth is related to recession and entitlement growth? Or could some of it be related to new and expanded government programs?

And to be honest I don't care where the growth came from. We need to cut spending and I am sure we can find lots and lots of places to cut if we really tried.
Here are a few examples:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...-that-the-u-s-government-is-spending-money-on
1.A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft.
2.The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians "gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions."
3.Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos
4.The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs spent $175 million during 2010 to maintain hundreds of buildings that it does not even use. This includes a pink, octagonal monkey house in the city of Dayton, Ohio.
5.$1.8 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars went for a "museum of neon signs" in Las Vegas, Nevada.
6.$35 million was reportedly paid out by Medicare to 118 "phantom" medical clinics that never even existed. (don't let Craig see this one)
7.The U.S. Census Bureau spent $2.5 million on a television commercial during the Super Bowl that was so poorly produced that virtually nobody understood what is was trying to say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOh5iG8drs8

 

[dca221]

The problem is that it is impossible to find where the extra spending is going from those high level charts.

For example "Human resources":
2007 = $1.7t t
2008 = $1.89 t
2009 = $2.15 t
2010 = $2.38 t
2011 = $2.50 t

Spending in that category has gone up by $800 billion in 5 years (that increase is more than our defense spending)
Are you suggesting that this entire growth is related to recession and entitlement growth? Or could some of it be related to new and expanded government programs?

really, this page has lots of good stuff, please look it up http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

here is your Human Resources category:

2007 2011Est
Human resources ==>1,758,391 2,509,495
Education, Training, Employment, and Social Services ==> 91,656 115,118
Health ==> 266,382 387,617
Medicare ==> 375,407 494,343
Income Security ==> 365,975 622,654
Social Security ==> 586,153 748,354
(On-budget) 19,307 117,465
(Off-budget) 566,846 630,889
Veterans Benefits and Services ==> 72,818 141,409

Much of the increase is in SS/MD and Income Security (which covers unemployment, food assistance, housing assistance, and federal employee retirement. Health bucket includes Medicaid grants to states and Children's Health Insurance. We can't afford to insure poor children, can we?

And to be honest I don't care where the growth came from.

Really? I thought you were mad at Obama for driving up the spending, the out-of-control government spending he created???

We need to cut spending and I am sure we can find lots and lots of places to cut if we really tried.
Here are a few examples:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...-that-the-u-s-government-is-spending-money-on
1.A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft.
2.The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians "gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions."
3.Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos
4.The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs spent $175 million during 2010 to maintain hundreds of buildings that it does not even use. This includes a pink, octagonal monkey house in the city of Dayton, Ohio.
5.$1.8 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars went for a "museum of neon signs" in Las Vegas, Nevada.
6.$35 million was reportedly paid out by Medicare to 118 "phantom" medical clinics that never even existed. (don't let Craig see this one)
7.The U.S. Census Bureau spent $2.5 million on a television commercial during the Super Bowl that was so poorly produced that virtually nobody understood what is was trying to say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOh5iG8drs8

OK, fine. Go ahead, find the waste, fraud, and abuse and cut it out. I agree with it. Make a good dent in the 12% of the federal spending. Then you can perhaps address defense. Then perhaps you can try SS/MD/MA, and see whether the people love their entitlement and want to raise taxes, or cut the entitlements.

Meanwhile, be sure to address the subsidies to oil companies, favorable tax deductions for corporate jets, and tax breaks for Paris Hilton

Finally, I keep asking, where is Obama's $800B spending binge?

 

[CLite]

Neat link. If you look under "Table 5.1—Budget Authority by Function and Subfunction: 1976–2016" it shows even more detail.

It seems like income security slowly raises from 2007 onwards due to ~5 programs. What I found most interesting was the sudden 150B spike in unemployment compensation and housing subsidy from 2008 to 2009, this makes sense as the situation started turning dire in late 2008.

 

[mchammer187]

The problem is that it is impossible to find where the extra spending is going from those high level charts.

For example "Human resources":
2007 = $1.7t t
2008 = $1.89 t
2009 = $2.15 t
2010 = $2.38 t
2011 = $2.50 t

Spending in that category has gone up by $800 billion in 5 years (that increase is more than our defense spending)
Are you suggesting that this entire growth is related to recession and entitlement growth? Or could some of it be related to new and expanded government programs?

And to be honest I don't care where the growth came from. We need to cut spending and I am sure we can find lots and lots of places to cut if we really tried.
Here are a few examples:
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...-that-the-u-s-government-is-spending-money-on
1.A total of $3 million has been granted to researchers at the University of California at Irvine so that they can play video games such as World of Warcraft.
2.The National Science Foundation spent $216,000 to study whether or not politicians "gain or lose support by taking ambiguous positions."
3.Approximately $1 million of U.S. taxpayer money was used to create poetry for the Little Rock, New Orleans, Milwaukee and Chicago zoos
4.The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs spent $175 million during 2010 to maintain hundreds of buildings that it does not even use. This includes a pink, octagonal monkey house in the city of Dayton, Ohio.
5.$1.8 million of U.S. taxpayer dollars went for a "museum of neon signs" in Las Vegas, Nevada.
6.$35 million was reportedly paid out by Medicare to 118 "phantom" medical clinics that never even existed. (don't let Craig see this one)
7.The U.S. Census Bureau spent $2.5 million on a television commercial during the Super Bowl that was so poorly produced that virtually nobody understood what is was trying to say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOh5iG8drs8

550-600 Billion of that growth is in mandatory spending (which is at least 80% entitlements) so those are programs that were set in motion before Barack Obama was ever president

Sure there is plenty of waste you act as if Obama is actively campaigning for this when it is just the status quo. Is that a problem yes but to put the blame on Obama's outrageous spending campaign is a fallacy.

 

[dca221]

550-600 Billion of that growth is in mandatory spending (which is at least 80% entitlements) so those are programs that were set in motion before Barack Obama was ever president

Sure there is plenty of waste you act as if Obama is actively campaigning for this when it is just the status quo. Is that a problem yes but to put the blame on Obama's outrageous spending campaign is a fallacy.

Reality has a well know liberal bias. Please don't let the facts get in the way of right-wing hacks attacking Obama.

 

[ElFenix]

GDP didn't pop, the bubble did. I see that Clinton's economy started at zero% REAL growth GDP and ended in the 4.5 ish range (for several years) and started declining as he left office. Being that the graph is of "REAL" GDP (inflation adjusted), looks like it's quite a bit of growth to me.

the 0 point was hit in 1991. clinton wasn't in office until 1993.