Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
I wrote about Obama's cynical, unserious budget in my column today so I won't revisit those points here, but I want to point out the NYT's treatment of this charade.
The Times uncritically cites his record $1.6 trillion deficit for this fiscal year (it's actually $1.645T) and glibly notes that he's "laid out a path for bringing down annual deficits to more sustainable levels over the rest of the decade." What are they calling sustainable? Budgets that exceed $1 trillion annually? Do we understand what this means? They are psychologically accepting that to operate with an annual shortfall of $1 trillion is fiscal hawkishness and "more sustainable."
Forgive me for being emotional at their lack of emotion at Obama's formula for guaranteed bankruptcy of the republic. Their headline even says that his budget "focuses on path to rein in deficit." "Rein in?" How can you characterize this other than delusional? Deceitful?
What's arguably worse is that in a summary paragraph introducing the article, they say that the budget "cuts some spending to free up funds for initiatives meant to improve competitiveness." Please explain to me the mindset that can depict money we don't have as being freed up? How do free up money that isn't there? It's kind of like calling the IOUs the government owes itself for ravaging Social Security, real money.
So here, let's dupe ourselves into thinking that running annual $1 trillion shortfalls is akin to balancing the budget and that we can allocate monies out of that figure however we want and as long as we don't exceed $1 trillion a year (which is also a fantasy) we'll make ourselves eligible for a Nobel Peace Prize for fiscal frugality. It's beyond preposterous and suicidally reckless.
And don't get me started on the concept of using phantom federal money "to improve competitiveness." Tell me why people who care at all about the future of this nation shouldn't be bouncing off the walls over this kind of thing. Are we that numb? Do the walls have no spring left in them?
Post Script: Excuse me for failing initially to mention that meanwhile Defense Secretary Gates is complaining that if defense cuts exceed $9 billion the Pentagon might not be able to do its job. Well, it's a little late in the game for these guys to be making that argument. Think about the $900 billion they literally wasted on their "stimulus" fiasco and the $53 billion more he wants to spend on his high-speed rail frolic.
- Comment (17)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Sep '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Facts just don't matter. I can recollect that candidate Obama in 2008 chastised the 400 Billion dollar deficits of the Bush years as reckless.
Jul '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
You mean,...you mean there really isn't a Social Security lock box like my teacher promised?
Deceit. 100% blatant, contemptuous deceit.
High speed rail? Pffft.
PBS/NPR/CPB? Pffft.
NEA? Pffft.
Department of Education? Pffft.
HUD? Pffft.
HHS? Pffft.
Department of Agriculture? DOA.
ObamaCare? Pffft.
Cap and Tax? Pffft.
TSA? Pffft.
Czars? Pffft.
Start from the FY2006 baseline and keep trimming.
Wheels up on Iraq and Afghanistan, no more support for the butchers of Sharia and their little boy friends.
Wheels up on Europe. Real civilizations require real militaries, not just bad teeth and confiscatory taxes.
Sell GM and Chevrolet for parts, restoring the bankruptcy laws. And maybe Ford and Toyota, too. They got their bailouts under the table.
Either hire a real DNI or defund the position.
Edited on Feb 14, 2011 at 8:00pmSep '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
He thinks that the "We the People" are ignorant enough to think "reining in the deficit" is the same as "reining in the debt." Or that we are just too occupied with "Dancing with the Stars" to not really be interested or focused. I hope he never realized that his "reigning" over such huge deficits, and doing nothing seriously to end them, will be the end of him politically. (Maybe he doesn't understand the difference between the two words. Maybe we should buy him a dictionary. On second thought, NOT)
I hope that when he loses in '12, that some smart ass pundit, say a Limbaugh or a Steyn, will parrot his words to Mubarak to "step aside" and other such crap he espoused during the middle of the recent crisis.
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Right, and first let's be sure we do not allow us to be numb to the numbers. I refuse to use trillions in describing the U.S. deficit. Obama has presented us with a budget that will spend $1,645 billion more than it takes from us in revenue (for now.)
Or, you could just do it in pennies.
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Worst. Budget. Ever.
After raising discretionary spending 80 percent, President Obama offers to freeze it for five years. He totally ignores the recommendations of his handpicked, Democrat-dominated deficit commission. And the tax increases are real and occur immediately, while the "cuts" kick in during the misty out-years, which is to say never.
The President is playing a cynical political game so he can run against Republican budget cuts next year. Bringing our society nearer to ruin in order to win an election is the sort of unseriousness that should be disqualifying for high office.
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
George Savage: Worst. Budget. Ever.
After raising discretionary spending 80 percent, President Obama offers to freeze it for five years. He totally ignores the recommendations of his handpicked, Democrat-dominated deficit commission. And the tax increases are real and occur immediately, while the "cuts" kick in during the misty out-years, which is to say never.
The President is playing a cynical political game so he can run against Republican budget cuts next year. Bringing our society nearer to ruin in order to win an election is the sort of unseriousness that should be disqualifying for high office. · Feb 14 at 8:13pm
And George, can those who suggest he's trying to harm the nation intentionally now be dismissed as unfair cynics? I mean your scenario is best case. I still don't know, but I do know he's the most fiscally reckless man to have occupied the office and it's not even close. So reckless we'll have great difficulty digging out from under the wreckage if it isn't reversed (or severely reduced) soon.
Jun '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
David, I usually try to avoid including links in my posts, but one of my favorite bloggers wrote a piece similar to yours. I usually read the guy for his topics about Russia, but his day job is economics. I'm tempted to recruit him over to Ricochet. He is especially adept at explaining the knawing details of financial reform. Anyway, read his take on the budget if you wish here. His name is Craig Pirrong and his website is called Streetwise Professor.
Jan '11
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
It's not? Aren't the interest charges on debt figured into our annual budget? And I'm reasonable sure principle repayments at maturity are as well. But I could be wrong.
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
I will, Dave, gracias.
Jul '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Sisyphus:
Start from the FY2006 baseline and keep trimming.
Edited on Feb 14 at 08:00 pm
2006? What a wuss! Let's start with 2000, before George W Bush's massive spending spree.
Dec '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
You know, I thought the discussion of Obama's FY2011 budget seemed familiar, so I looked it up and there it was: a similar critique of Clinton's FY1994 budget.
Clinton's 1995 budget plan projected, in the expression of the time, "$200 billion deficits as far as the eye can see." That the budget came into balance during Clinton's term was, according to the CATO Institute, was not so much due to Republican resistance to Clinton's spending as it was "a result of 1) an exceptionally strong economy that is creating gobs of new tax revenues and 2) a shrinking military budget." Too bad for Obama (and the rest of us) that he has no idea how to make the economy strong (let alone exceptionally strong) and that geopolitical considerations mean the military budget won't shrink anytime soon.
May '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
I simply do not understand.
Studies show that 90% of GDP debt levels reduce GDP by 1%. We will hit 100% in 2011. I don't know how many jobs that represents, but its a lot.
We are doing this at a time when unemployment/underemployment/dropped out of the work force is pushing 20%.
We are perilously close to an abyss, where our debt could wipe out financial security for most folks for a generation or more. I have seen devaluations and hyper inflation up close and personal and believe me, you don't want to go there.
And yet the President, the media and much (if not most) of Congress act like business as usual & $100 Billion in cuts on a $3,700 Billion budget is draconian. No (serious or other) talk about sustained budget surplus, which is what we desperately need.
Is it ignorance? David, even if Obama's aim was to ruin the country, why would the rest go along? Some kind of mass hypnotic at work?
Jan '11
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
According to the editors at NRO, W was the first president to push through a 2,000 billion dollar budget. With just one administration removed, Obama is trying to double that. I figured the past few budget busters were all non-recurring bailouts. What the heck is the government buying over what we had during Bush that nearly equals everything that we had 8 years ago? This is madness on stilts.
I get the feeling Nero is stringing his Guanari.
Jun '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
The man (Obama) and his congress just raised Federal outlays by 25% over the last two years! They have increased a National debt accumulated over 21/3 centuries from 9 trillion to 14.5 trillion, a 40% increase in just 3 years from that which took 233 years to incur. And now he submits a budget that adds even more spending programs and the congress is struggling to find a way to cut 70 billion from the remaining 7 months of this year. Isn't that just 2% of 3.5 trillion? And the media is standing around like the three monkeys. I am very peessed off. If we could increase our spending by 25% in two years, we can surely decrease it by 10% per year for four years. Freeze all hiring, have department heads submit new, reduced budgets, and MOST IMPORTANT...be honest with the American people. We can still do this, but not without pain.
Sep '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
I think everything O has done since the lame duck session has been primarily calculated to enhance his reelection bid. He intends to cast conservative as uncaring number crunchers, and himself as the caring centrists who is concerned. Unless conservatives begin to answer differently he will succeed. When he speaks of investing in education instead of haggling about numbers conservatives should reply that we are concerned also, concerned enough to make sure union bosses are no longer allowed to hold parents, teachers, pupils, tax payers and local school officials hostage. If we do this we might find out we are allocating sufficient funds, if not we may have to increase spending in this area. Will the President join us in confronting these corrupt bosses or is he too dependent on their continued political patronage? Replying to each issue along these lines is what is needed. The problem is that funds being spent are not being spent wisely and his political cohorts are behind most of this. Perhaps Christie’s backbone can be cloned and implanted in some more of the GOP.
May '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Well coming from the same crowd that looks at tax cuts as decreased federal spending, this all makes sense.
I can't make up my mind between deciding that 1) the administration knows exactly what it's doing and is purposefully running the economy into the ground or 2) has absolutely no idea what it is doing and would do better by simply making policy choices at random. At least then, statistical probability says some of their policies would have a benefit.
I'm convinced the Times would be accurate more often if it followed choice 2 above.
Jul '10
Re: Obama's Budget Charade and the NYT
Kenneth
Sisyphus:
Start from the FY2006 baseline and keep trimming.
Edited on Feb 14 at 08:00 pm
2006? What a wuss! Let's start with 2000, before George W Bush's massive spending spree. · Feb 14 at 8:28pm
You don't want to go before the Bush tax cuts. Unless you want to do it big, FY 1929 was Calvin Coolidge's last budget.