All we've heard for the last four years is that a credible approach toward a balanced budget through a plan that offers significant deficit reduction will increase public confidence in public finances and thereby increase private consumption and investment and spur economic growth. People know that this means lower taxes or borrowing in the future and consequently feel more certainty and engage in productive economic activity rather than hunker down. The tax increases now don't hurt because folks rely on lifetime income expectations for their spending and investment and don't have to worry about even larger tax hikes in the future. Certainty is restored and economic growth returns to the trend line and unemployment drops. Expansionary Austerity, if you will.

The CBO projects that crossing the fiscal cliff will significantly reduce the deficit...by as much as half by the end of the year which ought to do a lot to encourage the private sector to spend and invest due to the confidence in public finances that it will restore. Just a few short years ago, before the extension of the bush tax cuts in 2010 and the doc fix, we would've been projected to have budget balance by now!

Only a big government keynesian would believe that the people will continue to spend money from lower taxes and more defense contracts if it's in their pocket when it's obvious our budget gap would only get worse, increase uncertainty and decrease confidence.

I don't know how it would cut the deficit in half. Spending will still increase by the baseline, and then that will be cut by 0.25%. What a joke. The tax increases aren't going to bring $500+ billion. Your CBO is full of shit, no matter how much you want to believe their erroneous predictions every time they put one out.

Boat, the problem is that you always seem to ignore those of us who are not the "HUGE spending cuts NOW, balanced budget NOW" crowd.

I fully believe the budget needs to be balanced by spending cuts combined with economic growth. However, anyone who truly believes that we need to have drastic changes in a single month/year doesn't understand the economy (I can say the same for those that think we can spend ourselves out of everything).

You are jumping to the "see, those of you who don't believe in the Keynesian model, cuts are bad!"
When in reality the projections are based off of drastic cuts, not realistic cuts (small cuts each year) to balance the budget over a 5-7 year plan.

It's quite the scene to see someone so enamored with a policy no one practices.

jmog;1316488 wrote:Boat, the problem is that you always seem to ignore those of us who are not the "HUGE spending cuts NOW, balanced budget NOW" crowd.

I fully believe the budget needs to be balanced by spending cuts combined with economic growth. However, anyone who truly believes that we need to have drastic changes in a single month/year doesn't understand the economy (I can say the same for those that think we can spend ourselves out of everything).

You are jumping to the "see, those of you who don't believe in the Keynesian model, cuts are bad!"
When in reality the projections are based off of drastic cuts, not realistic cuts (small cuts each year) to balance the budget over a 5-7 year plan.

Lucky for you the effects of the fiscal cliff will take place slowly over the year. There's not going to be a huge, sudden, dynamic contraction. Allowing the crossing of the fiscal cliff follows your prescription for getting to a balanced budget over a 5-10 year plan. You're also forgetting that the concrete, solid additional step toward budget balance will increase confidence and thereby the economic growth you so desire.

You're framing the fiscal cliff as something hugely drastic and beyond budget cutting reason when Cleveland Buck is playing an unlikely ally of mine and demonstrating that it's really not that big and fits in line with the gradual approach you advocate.

Just admit you're cool with large budget deficits so long as taxes remain low and defense spending remains high and we'll be coo. :thumbup:

gut;1316506 wrote:It's quite the scene to see someone so enamored with a policy no one practices.

Why are you not advocating the crossing of the fiscal cliff so the confidence fairy can save us? LOL. Getting shy about those gut feelings are we? LOL

And let me add...the United States came close to practicing it when they ran low deficits to fake surpluses in the clinton years during good times and would've had continued to under a Gore presidency as Joseph instructed the Pharaoh way back in Genesis. The fiscal conservatives came in and shat it down their leg for supply side fantasies that resulted in the most anemic growth since WWII and you surely voted for it and now you're mr. deficit hawk. LOL.

BoatShoe has been acting like a damn fool these past few days.

BoatShoes;1316509 wrote:Why are you not advocating the crossing of the fiscal cliff so the confidence fairy can save us? LOL. Getting shy about those gut feelings are we? LOL

Because it's not a zero-sum or all-or-nothing game. The reckless spending is clearly weighing on the economy. This is why higher deficits aren't working. Wanting to avoid short-run shock and ease transitions is not the same a supporting endless deficits.

As I said, you continue to site Keynsian economics - in the face of reality all over the world playing out as classic theory predicts - as justification for endless and increasing deficit spending eventhough no one practices Keynsian economics. This is the great disconnect you are unable to grasp, no matter how many times it is explained to you.

sleeper;1316547 wrote:BoatShoe has been acting like a damn fool these past few days.

Meh. Plenty of people would have been doing the happy dance had Romney won, too. He's drunk with power...just let him sleep it off imo. :laugh:

sleeper;1316547 wrote:BoatShoe has been acting like a damn fool these past few days.

No, he generally always acts that way. He's just a bit more delusional than usual like most of the kool-aid drinkers who think they've just elected the Barrack Obama they THOUGHT they elected in 2008.

sleeper;1316547 wrote:BoatShoe has been acting like a damn fool these past few days.

Few days?

I just get a kick out of the liberals/keynesians that get so happy they piss down their leg when they talk about raising taxes on the rich (projected to gain less than $90B per year in revenue) but then act like any minute ACTUAL CUTS (not slower rates of growth) to spending is draconian and wanting to throw grandma off the cliff.

I honestly can't believe that BS actually thinks that taxing the rich by $90B doesn't hurt the economy but $90B in cuts will send us into a recession.

The insanity is mind blowing.

obama BIG government GDP growth: 3% to 2% to 1% to -1% next year = recession. Imagine that.


Greece now out of money and finally voted to reduce wage/pension/benefits; oh the wailing and gnashing of teeth; the central planners ran out of other people's money and had to end the gravy train. Spend, spend, spend; kick the can, kick the can, kick the can; ding, ding, ding; times up and nothing to show for it. The intellectual prowess is mind numbing.


LOL

QuakerOats;1316626 wrote:obama BIG government GDP growth: 3% to 2% to 1% to -1% next year = recession. Imagine that.


Greece now out of money and finally voted to reduce wage/pension/benefits; oh the wailing and gnashing of teeth; the central planners ran out of other people's money and had to end the gravy train. Spend, spend, spend; kick the can, kick the can, kick the can; ding, ding, ding; times up and nothing to show for it. The intellectual prowess is mind numbing.


LOL

Greece's problem is that they implemented harsh austerity measures which absolutely kill growth. We'll see the same sorts of things here if we let the 20% across the board cuts and tax raises happen. Austerity does not work.

so, when taxes are increased on the "rich" and a year or two later the deficit is still the same and spending is still increasing, who will be the scapegoats then?

tk421;1316768 wrote:so, when taxes are increased on the "rich" and a year or two later the deficit is still the same and spending is still increasing, who will be the scapegoats then?

Bush.

I Wear Pants;1316762 wrote:Greece's problem is that they implemented harsh austerity measures which absolutely kill growth. We'll see the same sorts of things here if we let the 20% across the board cuts and tax raises happen. Austerity does not work.

That's what investors and the markets demanded, not what Greece chose. The same thing will happen here if we continue to let the debt spiral out of control.

I Wear Pants;1316762 wrote:Greece's problem is that they implemented harsh austerity measures which absolutely kill growth. We'll see the same sorts of things here if we let the 20% across the board cuts and tax raises happen. Austerity does not work.

Greece had no choice. They couldn't borrow any more. Austerity (if you want to call it that) has nothing to do with it. There are two main reasons the Greek economy is dead. First, there is still so much debt that there is no capital available for business. Second, the government plans their entire economy, so there was never really any growth anyway.

Cleveland Buck;1316789 wrote:Greece had no choice. They couldn't borrow any more. Austerity (if you want to call it that) has nothing to do with it. There are two main reasons the Greek economy is dead. First, there is still so much debt that there is no capital available for business. Second, the government plans their entire economy, so there was never really any growth anyway.

Greece practices Obamanomics?

look, I don't see why this is so hard to understand. You can't tax your way out of this problem. Revenue has risen something like 20+% since 2000, but spending has doubled/tripled that. You aren't going to levy a tax/VAT, anything that will close the deficit and start to pay down the debt because DC WILL NOT STOP SPENDING! They won't institute a spending freeze, nothing. No matter how much more money you get in increased taxes, it will promptly be spent away.

tk421;1316839 wrote:look, I don't see why this is so hard to understand. You can't tax your way out of this problem. Revenue has risen something like 20+% since 2000, but spending has doubled/tripled that. You aren't going to levy a tax/VAT, anything that will close the deficit and start to pay down the debt because DC WILL NOT STOP SPENDING! They won't institute a spending freeze, nothing. No matter how much more money you get in increased taxes, it will promptly be spent away.

Get with the program. The Obama Revolution is here and now. Resistance is futile.

believer;1316848 wrote:Get with the program. The Obama Revolution is here and now. Resistance is futile.

oh, right I forgot, Obama is "different" from the usual politician. I guess I should hope for some change, huh?

tk421;1316839 wrote: You aren't going to levy a tax/VAT

It's political suicide, I'd think. But I'd actually support if it was truly a flat tax (on non-necessities). No gaming, no credits - everyone pays the same tax on their IPhone. It would give everyone skin in the game, and then everyone might start to see and feel how out-of-control spending is. Besides being necessary at some point, it's the only way I can see that might force a cultural change.

And let's be honest - most of the corporate taxes already get passed thru to the consumer, anyway, so this just makes it more visible and transparent.

gut;1316778 wrote:That's what investors and the markets demanded, not what Greece chose. The same thing will happen here if we continue to let the debt spiral out of control.

Cleveland Buck;1316789 wrote:Greece had no choice. They couldn't borrow any more. Austerity (if you want to call it that) has nothing to do with it. There are two main reasons the Greek economy is dead. First, there is still so much debt that there is no capital available for business. Second, the government plans their entire economy, so there was never really any growth anyway.

As a whole the Eurozone could have approached the problem differently. Austerity was not the only option and is always a bad option. It has never worked.