So how should the various deficit-reduction commissions, including the one Obama created, proceed? Here are three suggestions.

First, start not with "entitlements" but with a broader assessment of what we will ask government to do over the next two generations. Be candid about priorities. This includes entitlements and what we should spend on national defense.

Second, offer a menu of the fairest and most economically efficient ways of raising the needed revenue.

Third, propose a capital budget for the federal government so debt can be used the way it's supposed to be used. Except in bad economic times, we shouldn't borrow to cover government's day-to-day costs. But government activities that enhance the prospects of future generations should be financed over time, much as successful companies use debt for long-term investments. There's smart debt and there's stupid debt. We need to recognize the difference.

ejdionne@washpost.com http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/10/AR2010031002851.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1⊂=AR

Americans are too vapid and our politicians are too chicken shit to deal with the deficit effectively. The only way we will implement austerity is when we default on our debt and our lenders enforce it for us by not lending us more.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/13-11.htm

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Americans are too vapid and our politicians are
> too chicken shit to deal with the deficit
> effectively. The only way we will implement
> austerity is when we default on our debt and our
> lenders enforce it for us by not lending us more.


That's so pathetic and so true all at the same time.

__________________________________
That's not a ladybug, that's a cannapiller.

- Fully separate pools of money such as Soc Sec, Medicare taxes, etc. That way the surplus/deficit for each program can be measured and adjusted properly. Using these funds over the years to "balance" the budget is patent BS.

- Automatic and mandatory spending freezes have to go into affect for all areas of the Federal budget whenever there is a deficit in a FY, and those cannot be lifted without a bill authorizing the expenditure

- No more earmark spending. All spending has to be justified and authorized in the Bill and cannot be put in by staffers in late night re-writes/amendments.

- Appropriation bills for each major expenditure area should be fully separated. No more (for example) adding unemployment benefits to a defense authorization Bill so you can play gotcha politics with the issue and tie unrelated issues together.

You can define "enhance prospects of future generations" as almost anything depending on who is in power. That won't really work.

Quote

...
True, unemployment in our country is still too high. But the lesson here is not that President Obama's economic stimulus failed but that it was too small to do all that was needed. Those who would repeal stimulus spending -- the bright idea of the House Republican Study Committee -- would take us backward.
...

That is some patent BS. The stimulus that was authorized was like a grab bag of goodies spending plan. They have only spent $200B+ of the funds so far (maybe $300B by now?) - and yet folks are all saying it was a success. So which is it - too much or too little? And how are the long term effects going to turn out - no one has any clue on that yet. Hyper-inflation or deflation are still strong possibilities.

At this point we know they are going to have to raise taxes, but they have to put in across the board reductions on ALL federal agencies now to stem the flood. They can't approve federal agency hiring increases when we are in serious deficit spending mode. And they need to seriously evaluate the kind of entitlement spending going on right now and make sure that it is being correctly applied. For instance Soc Sec can be paid out for any number of reasons these days - not just as a retirement benefit.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Warhawk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Americans are too vapid and our politicians are
> > too chicken shit to deal with the deficit
> > effectively. The only way we will implement
> > austerity is when we default on our debt and
> our
> > lenders enforce it for us by not lending us
> more.
>
>
> That's so pathetic and so true all at the same
> time.

+1

For instance...

Gov't workers feel no economic pain
Security, wages, benefits beat private sector's
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/11/government-workers-feel-no-pain/

Quote

...
Private-industry employers spent an average of $27.42 per hour worked for total employee compensation in December, while total compensation costs for state and local government workers averaged $39.60 per hour.

The average government wage and salary per hour of $26.11 was 35 percent higher than the average wage and salary of $19.41 per hour in the private sector. But the percentage difference in benefits was much higher. Benefits for state and local workers averaged $13.49 per hour, nearly 70 percent higher than the $8 per hour in benefits paid by private businesses.

Paul Booth, executive assistant to the president at the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), attributed the pay difference to a changing government work force that has increased its proportion of higher-skilled workers during the past 15 to 20 years.

"In government payrolls, you no longer have low-wage occupations, such as janitors, whose jobs have been contracted out to the private sector," he said. This trend has effectively increased the average wage of those higher-skilled workers who remain, said Mr. Booth, whose union represents 1.6 million workers.
...

There is some serious BS right there. Yes, they do contract out certain jobs - the problem is, they don't get rid of the folks whose jobs they contract out for. Secondly, government pay scales - in particular local ones - over the years were constantly "adjusted" to keep up with privater sector salaries for similar positions. Now though with the economic restructuring, there are many folks who are probably "overpaid" in comparison to what the private sector is doing. Many of the local governments stopped comparing themselves to the private sector many years ago and just started comparing themselves to each other - every few years spiraling up salary increases because other jurisdictions were higher then theirs.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2010 12:19PM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> That is some patent BS. The stimulus that was
> authorized was like a grab bag of goodies spending
> plan. They have only spent $200B+ of the funds so
> far (maybe $300B by now?) - and yet folks are all
> saying it was a success. So which is it - too much
> or too little? And how are the long term effects
> going to turn out - no one has any clue on that
> yet. Hyper-inflation or deflation are still strong
> possibilities.
>

I thought about 50% of the stimulus fund was in Tax Breaks so really it's only around 350-400B cash outlays right?

Supposedly it was only $100B in tax breaks if that. Most of the folks I know that made a point of using the home buyer credit have had nothing but trouble from using it.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

WashingTone-Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Americans are too vapid and our politicians are
> too chicken shit to deal with the deficit
> effectively. The only way we will implement
> austerity is when we default on our debt and our
> lenders enforce it for us by not lending us more.


/thread

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Supposedly it was only $100B in tax breaks if
> that. Most of the folks I know that made a point
> of using the home buyer credit have had nothing
> but trouble from using it.


http://www.recovery.gov/Pages/home.aspx

It's in thirds. 288B in tax benefits.

Still, you had a point? My information was correct. Getting close to $300B total - not even half used. Truly, the WAPO OP was deluded.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Attachments:

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Still, you had a point? My information was
> correct. Getting close to $300B total - not even
> half used. Truly, the WAPO OP was deluded.


I suppose my point was that the GOP seems to always point to the stimulus as "wasteful" spending when the lionshare was in tax breaks (and, in fact, the economy seems to be improving). BTW- I wasn't expecting all 800B to be spent in 1yr, were you?

Re: Entitlements - make available to US citizens only. It would cut down the participation dramatically and serve as an incentive to those who really want to be Americans.

Fairfax Felix Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Re: Entitlements - make available to US citizens
> only. It would cut down the participation
> dramatically and serve as an incentive to those
> who really want to be Americans.

It's a nice thought - unfortunately their next piece of legislation on the horizon is granting a pass to the current group of illegals in the country. That way they can satisfy Obama's point that "only persons in the country legally" would be eligible for our programs.

But your point is valid - unfortunately not likely to be reality.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

pne Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Still, you had a point? My information was
> > correct. Getting close to $300B total - not
> even
> > half used. Truly, the WAPO OP was deluded.
>
>
> I suppose my point was that the GOP seems to
> always point to the stimulus as "wasteful"
> spending when the lionshare was in tax breaks
> (and, in fact, the economy seems to be improving).
> BTW- I wasn't expecting all 800B to be spent in
> 1yr, were you?

I would have expected whatever plan they put in place to be spent within 1-2 yrs yes. That's why it was called a stimulus. At this point all it has been is a "slow down the bleed" for State government plan. They are only now coming up with a stimulus that includes tax breaks for hiring workers, etc. If getting loans were much harder, and a lot of folks were out of work - a stimulus bill that didn't emphasize incentives to hire workers (and the last one didn't) really wasn't all that helpful. I also remember some commentary back a few months ago where they had originally planned to do much of the spending right before the 2010 elections so I suppose we will see a glut of new spending shortly. But they probably still will not spend all that much more in the coming months.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/12/2010 08:39AM by Registered Voter.

RV - There is some serious BS right there. Yes, they do contract out certain jobs - the problem is, they don't get rid of the folks whose jobs they contract out for.

This is a lie. While all people displaced by contracting out initiatives are subject to priority placement..and have salaries protected for up to 3 years..eventually the total number of people employed is reduced. Most of the people impacted by contracting out actually end up working for the contractor..at reduced wages.

Bottomline on the issue is that it takes two political parties to cut a deal to cut spending and increase taxes. With only 1 political party interested in taking serious actions...very little will be done...unless of course democrats shove it down the American people's throat.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

BS V - having worked for the fed as a contractor I can say unequivocally that the contractor pay was generally much higher (unless they were from India or something) then the government workers. Lately now, they may have gotten to the point where their protected government wages remained higher then everyone else's, but after 15 yrs working in contracting project management you are outright lying now.

The only reduction in federal FTE's comes generally with the use of "attrition" - pure and simple. The military will do some force-outs but the general federal workforce - BS. Maybe - maybe in the custodial sectors they might do that - but when I was down there they already contracted the custodial workers and that was years ago. Contractors come and go, and the workers tend to shift between employers, but the normal federal worker does not get replaced and then move to a contract worker. Priority placement usually ensures that if someone wants a new position somewhere they get it - unless there are assholes in management who work against them so that usually they go and find a new job on their own. But that process happens what, less than 0.05% of the time - if that. Normally the job is contracted out and no job displacement occurs at all.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

You and ShadowBrain have a lot in common now. You only act as trolls. I will give you points for originality though - ShadowBrain is merely a reflection of others he wants to score points with.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University