Saturday, August 27, 2011

Lecture 20. DEFICIT SPENDING


Lecture 20. DEFICIT SPENDING

Debt Hysteria

While other nations are investing in their future, too many of our leaders are telling us to retrench, to tighten our belts. Deficit hawks are consumed by the fear of debt. They tell us that we need only agree on the taxes to be increased and the programs to be cut until our budget is balanced and our debt is small enough to hide. The current debt hysteria is pure hype spun by deficit hawks shilling for lower tax rates on the top brackets and/or a value added tax. The VAT is a regressive national sales tax, an attempt to destroy our progressive income tax. Our sales and gasoline taxes provide sufficient means to restrain consumption. Inequality of income is bad enough as it is. If the top brackets pay less, the other brackets will pay more. We’re OK when we can spot a shill. There is a semantic confusion about "debt" and a "balanced budget". The terms are not mutually exclusive. We all live simultaneously with both. We have debts with scheduled payments and we have balanced budgets that include the payments. Every home-owner and every business and every nation uses credit to finance the future. When we accept credit, we owe a debt. When we spend, it is deficit spending. Everybody does it. Our world could not function without deficit spending. Yet, there are still voters who complain: I balance my budget. Why can’t Washington? But if the voter is paying a home mortgage, a car loan, a student loan, or a business loan, she is balancing her budget by satisfying her creditors. That is exactly the way the federal government does it. There is no other way to function. We’re all OK when we can pay our bills. We never leave only our debts to our grandchildren. We leave them both our debts and our assets. We’re OK when our assets greatly exceed our debts. That is exactly the reason that debt is not our real economic problem. Our real problem is the enduring unemployment of our material and human resources that should be increasing our assets. Every day of continued recession is a lost opportunity to increase and modernize our national wealth - our energy supply and our transportation and communication systems. To keep up with other nations, we should now be repairing, rebuilding, and renewing our falling bridges, rickety railroads, failing education system, and other vital infrastructure. The simple fact is that instead of a deficit problem or a debt problem, we have an unemployment problem that causes a revenue problem. The revenue problem will be solved when the Bush tax cuts expire in 2013. The unemployment problem will be solved by infrastructure investment. We also have a health care cost problem that is not simply a Medicare problem. Medicare administrative costs are far less than private insurance costs. As a later lecture will show, the health care problem can be solved with a single-payer insurance system. (The UN's World Health Organization rated France's system as the best. Their per-capita cost is half of ours.)

SPENDING HYSTERIA

When asked to specify a spending cut, the deficit hawk will first change the subject back to deficits. When pressured, he will mention either the new health care law (which will reduce health care spending according to the CBO) or the stimulus (which pays for itself, as a previous lecture proved) or TARP (which may also return a profit). On examination of 2010 federal spending, we find (by googling into Wikipedia): Mandatory Spending: $2.184T (67.5%) (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Debt Interest, TARP, and ARRA) Discretionary Spending Security: 0.833 (25.7%) (Defense, Homeland, State. Foreign aid < 2%) Discretionary Spending Non-Security, including Agriculture: 0.026 (0.8%) (subsidies for rich farmers) Energy 0.026 (0.8%) Justice: 0.024 (0.7%) (Mostly Drug War) NASA: 0.019 (0.6%) All other: (Commerce, Interior, Treasury, HUD, Transportation, etc.) 0.105 (3.2%) _______ Total Spending $3.236T (100%) The current discretionary, non-security spending is barely more than it was under Bush. On examination of the budget, it is obvious that the major costs are defense, health care, and Social Security. Defense costs can be analyzed only by national defense insiders. Others can only study available information and vote accordingly. The other two items will be discussed in later lectures Considering that we are trying to recover from the worst economic collapse since the Great Depression, total spending is not at all out of line with the Reagan administration in the 1980s, as this chart shows: Government spending vs GDP The shaded stripes are periods of recession. Potential GDP refers to the economy at full capacity. This eliminates the effect of declining revenue during a recession. Government consumption includes wages and other administrative expenses. Transfers refer to funding state programs. The recent uptick is due to unemployment benefits and ARRA help to the states. So Obama's huge spending spree turns out to be TARP {which may return a profit) and ARRA (which will probably break even). When a politician talks about spending cuts, show him this list and ask for specific cuts. End of discussion.

Proceed to: Lecture 21. BUDGETS & INFRASTRUCTURE


Thanks for your interest. Marvin Sussman, retired engineer If you don’t like the world as it is, change it this way!:
1. Depress the Shift Key, sweep the cursor over the following URL, click, copy, and paste it on email to friends, and ask them to do the same: Keynesian Economics 101 The ONLY way out of this mess Free lectures on-line: KeynesForum.blogspot.com
2. To print and distribute single-sheet “invitations” to this site, click here and ask your friends to do the same.
3. To donate toward advertising this website, click the yellow “Donate” button below. You will be asked for your PayPal account password. If you don't have a PayPal account, you will need a credit card.
And ask your friends to do the same.
Copyright © 2011 Marvin Sussman All rights reserved.

No comments:

Post a Comment