Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Not That I Am Not Grateful 18

Journal by pudge

$40 billion is a lot of money. Across five years, it is still a lot of money. And I am happy for any reduction in spending and the deficit. But do not expect me to applaud a reduction effort that results in only $8 billion per year, when our deficit is over $300 billion.

The CBO says last year's deficit was $331B, and this year's will be $314B. So according to this -- if it applies this year, which I don't know, but for the sake of argument -- our deficit this year will be "only" $306B. Wooo.

And perhaps worse -- a sign of things to come, maybe? -- for the first two months of FY2006, our deficit is $130B, which is $15B higher than it was last year at this time. So even with this "cut" we are so far still behind last year!

Granted, it's only two months, and with an improving economy, we can expect higher tax receipts this year (especially over the next few months) than last year. But still, this $8B just isn't, well, exciting to me. On the contrary, that the number is so small is downright depressing.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Not That I Am Not Grateful More

Not That I Am Not Grateful

Comments Filter:
  • I agree. I always hate the stupid trick of announcing a big number, and then putting 'over N years' in the fine print. It's much more honest and meaningful to put things in annual terms IMO.

  • Moo (Score:2)

    by Chacham ( 981 ) *
    I think we should have three rules.

    1) Congress can only spend what money is already in the treasury the year before.

    2) Emergency items can supercede rule 1 by 2/3 vote.

    3) If rule 2 was effected the year prior, rule 1 is amended to "Congress can only spend what money is already in the treasury the year before, less any money owed for emergency spending."

    The word deficit itself is an excuse to overspend. We either have debt, or we don't. And we shouldn't, even if it hurts. Like every household, you can only s

    • Re:Moo (Score:2)

      by pudge ( 3605 ) *
      Some states have similar rules. Basically, that you cannot carry a deficit more than two years. So if you go over this year, you have to pay it off the next. I don't know how they handle revolving debt.

      • Re:Moo (Score:2)

        by Chacham ( 981 ) *
        The main point would be rule 1 though, that, normally, you can only spend what is *already* in the treasury.
  • That would reduce the deficit a lot more.
    • You mean tax increases? No, they would likely increase the deficit, by killing economic growth. This is quite clear.

      Remember, the CBO was quite clear that the tax cut in 2003 contributed to increased growth, and to increased revenues, in FY2004 (where we saw a huge deficit reduction, on the order of over $50 billion dollars, or about 15 percent. The 2003 tax cuts had a HUGE impact on deficit reduction. Increasing those taxes would likely have the reverse effect.
      • Well, how about trying a little increase in that minimum wage? These economic gains have been top-heavy, and poor people are notoriously bad at finding tax shelters, so not only do you get more cash changing hands but it'll do so in a really tax-friendly way.
        • Raising minimum wage also slows growth and typically causes companies to cut rank and file employees.

          One Clinton era boon that we all miss was the tech r&d tax credit. That worked. It's still there, just not as big.
        • Raising minimum wage increases inflation and raises unemployment. Do you really believe the higher ups are going to soak up the cost of paying the employees more? No, they are going to pass it along to the consumer (inflation of prices) and lay off (unemployment) folks to keep costs down and overwork those who are left.

          Then, those who had their minimum wage increased now pay more because of inflation and those who were laid off are even worse off because of inflation.

          Do you hate the poor?
      • I'm always amused at how the 2001 and 2002 tax cuts go into the memory hole.

        No, the increased tax revenue is due to the amazing 13% productivity increase since the start of the recovery (4+% each year for 3 years). Even Bush can't completely piss away the unstoppable juggernaut of the American worker staying late and Silicon Valley cranking up the tech.

        But he sure tried hard [epi.org]. This recovery started off OK, and then went into the tank for two years while Iraq beat up consumer confidence.

        $260 billion in

  • It's quite enjoyable to see the list of things Republicans cut [cbpp.org] to get to their awesome total of $8 billion a year. A laugh riot.

    Here's my third-place winner. Over 5% of that amount is thanks to cuts in child support enforcement, with the CBO estimating that, every year now, mothers and children will get cheated out of hundreds of millions of dollars thanks to the GOP wink-and-nod at deadbeat dads.

    In second place, holding back Social Security checks from poor cripples. Hilarious!

    And my favorite part of

    • Over 5% of that amount is thanks to cuts in child support enforcement, with the CBO estimating that, every year now, mothers and children will get cheated out of hundreds of millions of dollars thanks to the GOP wink-and-nod at deadbeat dads.

      Given that federal child support enforcement is unconstitutional, I think it should be cut entirely.

      In second place, holding back Social Security checks from poor cripples. Hilarious!

      They still get the money, but over time, instead of in a lump sum. Your characterizat
      • I'm curious - why do you think federal enforcement of child support is unconstitutional?

        • I was speaking too broadly; it may be constitutional, but (generally speaking) only if the offender crosses state lines. Otherwise, routine child support issues are a state matter.

Slashdot Top Deals

In a five year period we can get one superb programming language. Only we can't control when the five year period will begin.

Close