Budget Deficit

You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (977)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (1042)
Play WMV Play Quicktime
(h/t David at VideoCafe)

Amazing, how concerned bobbleheads become about the deficit right after the Republican administration that created it has left the scene of the crime. As people like Paul Krugman keep reminding us, there are obvious economic reasons the deficit cannot be the priority during a major recession. But those facts seem to elude David Gregory during this NBC News’ “Meet the Press” interview with Tim Geithner:

DAVID GREGORY: Let me talk about the deficit and the debt. These are alarming numbers. You've said they are. Let's look at the deficit-- since inauguration day. $1.2 trillion, now $1.4 trillion. It's up 17 percent. The overall debt, inauguration day, $10.6 trillion, now, $11.9 trillion. What's it gonna be a year from now?

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: Well, it's gonna have to come down now. It's-- it's too high. And I think everybody understands this. You know, we got these two central imperatives. Restore growth, create jobs. But make sure people understand we're gonna have to bring those fiscal deficits down as growth recovers. First growth, though. Without growth, you can't fix those long term fiscal problems. But you're not gonna have a recovery that's gonna be strong enough unless people are confident we're gonna have the will to go back to living within our means.

DAVID GREGORY: How do you bring it down, though? Do taxes have to go up?

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: Well, we're gonna have to do-- we're gonna have to make some hard choices. But we're not really at the point yet, David, where we're gonna know what's gonna be the best path forward. The President's very committed to bringing down these deficits. He's very committed to doing so in a way that's not gonna add to the burden of people-- people making less than $250,000 a year.

DAVID GREGORY: I mean, I think a lot of people - I think its fair to say - what are hard choices? I mean, what hard choices have been made so far? Are you gonna raise taxes?

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: We're gonna have to bring our resources and our expenditures more into balance.

DAVID GREGORY: So, it's possible.

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: Well-- again, the President's committed to make sure we get this economy back on track. We'll bring down deficits over time. And--

DAVID GREGORY: But Mr. Secretary you talked about hard choices. So, why can't you give a straight answer as to whether taxes have to come up, when you have a deficit this big?

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: Because David, right now we're focused on getting growth back on track. Okay? And we're not at the point yet where we have to decide exactly what it's gonna take. And I just want to say this very clearly. He was committed in the campaign to make-- he said in the campaign. And he is committed to make sure we do this in a way that is not gonna add to the burden on people making less than $250,000 a year. Now, it's gonna be hard to do that. But he's committed to doing that. And we can do that.

DAVID GREGORY: You can do it. But it's still a chance that you'd have to raise taxes and go back on that, if you've got a debt this big?

Continue reading »



TOPICS

debt_b69dd.gif
Ever notice the deficits are only a problem when Democrats spend to help the rest of us?

Krugman explains why the deficit isn't the huge problem Republicans always say it is (but only when there's a Democratic president, of course):

So is there anything to worry about? Yes, but the dangers are political, not economic.

As I’ve said, those 10-year projections aren’t as bad as you may have heard. Over the really long term, however, the U.S. government will have big problems unless it makes some major changes. In particular, it has to rein in the growth of Medicare and Medicaid spending.

That shouldn’t be hard in the context of overall health care reform. After all, America spends far more on health care than other advanced countries, without better results, so we should be able to make our system more cost-efficient.

But that won’t happen, of course, if even the most modest attempts to improve the system are successfully demagogued — by conservatives! — as efforts to “pull the plug on grandma.”

So don’t fret about this year’s deficit; we actually need to run up federal debt right now and need to keep doing it until the economy is on a solid path to recovery. And the extra debt should be manageable. If we face a potential problem, it’s not because the economy can’t handle the extra debt. Instead, it’s the politics, stupid.


TOPICS Video Cafe
You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!
DOWNLOADS: (95)
Download WMV Download Quicktime
PLAYS: (205)
Play WMV Play Quicktime

So where do Conserva-Dems retreat when they want to get their Republican "centrist" talking points out there on health care reform? Why Sean Hannity's show of course.

HANNITY: Senator, always good to have you. Thank you for being back with us. Appreciate it.

BAYH: Good to be back with you, Sean.

HANNITY: All right. Let's start a little bit with the House version and the House turmoil that's been unfolding all week here. First, we hear that there's a deal with the Blue Dogs, the more conservative Democrats. They you've got the liberal congressmen rebelling, and you've got turmoil here and you've got a president that really wanted to push this through in two weeks and hadn't read the bill.

As you stand back, what is one to make of this process?

BAYH: Well, to the average American, Washington probably looks a little chaotic, Sean. But the important thing here is that we take our time and get it right. This affects every American. And particularly those 65 percent who currently have insurance. We need to make sure that we try and keep their costs under control going forward.

That's what's bothering most people. And put into place some reforms that make sure they won't lose their insurance. If they lose their job or they've got a health care condition of some kind. So that's number one. Number two, get the deficit down. This has got to be a part of long-term fiscal responsibility. Not making it go up.

And third, we shouldn't hurt the economy in the short run and this has got to be part of a long-term strategy to make America more competitive. So, you know, all these shenanigans and going on, it's regrettably part of the process but matters, Sean, is we have to keep our eye on the ball and at the end of all this deliver a product that's good for America.

Continue reading »


TOPICS Video Cafe

Weekly Address: Efficiency and Innovation

From the White House blog:

With the process of going through the budget line by line in full swing, the President uses his Weekly Address to give some examples, big and small, of how the Administration is working to cut costs and eliminate waste. The President also announces two new key appointments, Jeffrey Zients as Chief Performance Officer and Aneesh Chopra as Chief Technology Officer, who will be invaluable in streamlining the way government functions through efficiency and innovation.

Full transcript below the fold.

Continue reading »


Remember When: Congress Passes $1.4 Trillion Economic Package

thune_stack_fa87f.JPG
As President Obama finally starts to fight for his economic stimulus bill, roadblock Republicans in the Senate continue to decry the price tag. While John Thune (R-SD) described how many times $1 trillion worth of $100 bills would circle the earth, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) proclaimed "Americans can't afford a trillion-dollar mistake." Of course, back in 2001, the GOP had no qualms (along with some invertebrate Democrats) in passing George W. Bush's much larger $1.4 trillion tax cut package. And as today's unending sea of red ink and unprecedented upward redistribution of wealth attest, the Republican Party is simply calling for more of the same.

Unlike the 7.6% unemployment rate and $1.2 trillion deficit Barack Obama inherited, George W. Bush arrived at the White House with a federal budget surplus and joblessness at 4.2% - and no mandate. But as every sentient being outside of the mainstream media will recall, Bush promised to slash taxes for the wealthiest Americans, including an end to the estate tax (lovingly rebranded by GOP spinmeisters as the "death tax."). And despite his loss of the popular vote to Al Gore and facing a 50-50 Senate, President Bush and his team made clear there would be no search for common ground with Democrats in pursuit of the 10-year, $1.6 trillion package. As Vice President Dick Cheney put it on December 17, 2000:

"As President-elect Bush has made very clear, he ran on a particular platform that was very carefully developed. It's his program, it's his agenda, and we have no intention at all of backing off of it. It's why we got elected.

So we're going to aggressively pursue tax changes, tax reform, tax cuts, because it's important to do so. [...] The suggestion that somehow, because this was a close election, we should fundamentally change our beliefs, I just think is silly."

For his part, Bush presented the tax cuts as the cure for whatever might ail the economy, both a tasty dessert topping and a floor polish.

Continue reading »


McCain Attacks Bush for Economic Policies They Share

One day after proclaiming on Meet the Press that he and George W. Bush share a common philosophy, John McCain took to a stage in Cleveland Monday to attack the President's economic policies. As it turns out, of course, when it comes to ideology and policy on the economy, John McCain and George W. Bush are virtually indistinguishable.

The feebleness of McCain's effort to distance himself from Bush was revealed in its brevity. Despite the AP's headline that "McCain says Bush policy on economy is wrong," McCain's critique was limited to a single sentence. And in those nine words and the attack on Barack Obama that followed, John McCain wasn't telling the truth:

"This is the fundamental difference between Senator Obama and me. We both disagree with President Bush on economic policy. The difference is that he thinks taxes have been too low, and I think that spending has been too high."

Leaving aside for the moment his dissembling on the Obama tax plan (which the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center concluded would offer larger tax cuts to Americans at every income level below $112,000), McCain simply lied about parting company with George W. Bush.

A quick glance at their shared approach to tax cuts, the deficit and health care confirms that George W. Bush and John McCain are joined at the hip.

Continue reading »


As ThinkProgress reported, CNN on Tuesday showed a deceptive chart which wrongly suggests that John McCain's tax plan provides more Americans with greater savings than that offered by Barack Obama. But CNN's upper-crust income brackets, which start at $161,000 and represent only 5% of taxpayers, conceal the inescapable truth that Barack Obama's proposals offer working and middle class Americans steeper tax benefits at every income level up to $110,000. And according to a new Gallup poll released this week, that truth isn't lost on American voters.

By 48% to 43%, Americans surveyed by Gallup say Obama would better handle the issue of taxes than John McCain. And with good reason. As the Washington Post detailed, an analysis by the Tax Policy Center showed:

"Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy."

Continue reading »