Patterico's Pontifications

7/22/2019

Trump and Democrats Agree on Big Spending

Filed under: Politics — DRJ @ 8:05 pm



[Headline from DRJ]

While Trump has focused his base on The Squad, Trump, Democrats clinch two-year budget deal:

“I am pleased to announce that a deal has been struck with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy — on a two-year Budget and Debt Ceiling, with no poison pills,” Trump tweeted.
***
“If this deal passes, President Trump will have increased discretionary spending by as much as 22 percent over his first term and enshrine trillion-dollar deficits into law,” said CRFB President Maya MacGuineas.

CRFB estimated that the deal could add as much as $2 trillion to deficits over the decade.

— DRJ

35 Responses to “Trump and Democrats Agree on Big Spending”

  1. I’ve posted this elsewhere, but since this thread is specifically about the budget, the CRFB (Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget) has this cool “DebtFixer” website where you can try your hand at bringing down the debt through a combination of dozens of potential spending and revenue changes policy changes:

    http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer/

    You need to find $7.8T in cuts or additional revenue over the next 10 years to stabilize the debt in 2029 down at “only” 70% of GDP.

    Dave (1bb933)

  2. Then this story is doubtless an attempt to provide cover

    I’d call it “blowing smoke out of his @ss”, but regardless – the cultists will eat it up!

    Dave (1bb933)

  3. Sure I broke your leg, but reelect me and I’ll give you a crutch.

    nk (dbc370)

  4. but reelect me and I’ll give you a crutch kiss it and make it better.

    nk (dbc370)

  5. I’d typed a bunch of words, about economic policy, hiring qualified people, forcing hard decisions…but delete that.

    Donald Trump is a moron, that is all.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (6e7a1c)

  6. Reaganomics.

    😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  7. So what’s the over-under on Trump hearing criticism about trillion-dollar deficits, calling the deal terrible and threatening to veto it?

    Two days?

    Dave (1bb933)

  8. I think in the last six decades we have learned a couple of economic truisms:

    1. No matter how much we wish it, tax cuts don’t pay for themselves in increased economic activity, at least after the initial shot in the arm is delivered.

    2. No matter how much we wish it, increased social spending doesn’t pay for itself in reducing its own need down the road, as its promised long-term benefits never quite emerge.

    JVW (54fd0b)

  9. Terrible decision. Where are the cuts? Where’s the reductions in government? We cannot just grow our way out of insane spending.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  10. JVW,

    I disagree with you on tax cuts as they have paid for themselves, but the problem is there’s just massive amounts of new spending as well as ever higher spiraling spending on “fixed” costs like Medicare, Social Security and state giveaways with federal matches.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  11. Tax cuts offset part of their expense. They can never “pay for themselves”.

    The CRFB debunks this idea (which I myself long believed, and propounded) here.

    It’s a very nice quantitative explanation, but the basic reason is simple:

    There is no theoretical basis to suggest tax cuts could be self-financing. To do that, the economy would need to grow by $5 to $6 for every $1 of tax cuts.

    Dave (1bb933)

  12. So what’s the over-under on Trump hearing criticism about trillion-dollar deficits, calling the deal terrible and threatening to veto it?

    Two days?

    And that will last for two days, and then he’ll sign it.

    Orange-gnome-ics.

    nk (dbc370)

  13. I already said my piece here (and two thumbs up for that kind of thread theme). These days, fiscal conservatives in DC are as rare as Republicans in Congress who have bucked against this Trump administration. Sigh.

    Paul Montagu (dbd3cc)

  14. I disagree with you on tax cuts as they have paid for themselves…

    Um, they didn’t, not by a long shot. The best that can be said is they spurred some short-term economic growth, which actually isn’t needed when the economy is already in flux. In a high-growth economy, that’s the best time to cut spending and cut our budget deficits, not what’s going on now.

    Paul Montagu (dbd3cc)

  15. That’s exactly what Keynes said, Paul. He’s probably the most misunderstood economist of the 20th century. He’s most remembered for saying “deficit spending is a moral imperative of government,” which progressives, and now conservatives, took to mean deficit spending is the moral imperative of government.

    Classic example of a quote taken out of context. What Keynes actually said was deficit spending is a moral imperative of government during times of economic contraction, such as a recession or depression. But during times of economic expansion, he argued for reduced spending so that government could add to the treasury, in anticipation of the next contraction.

    Keynes understood economic cycles. During contraction, deficits are imperative. During expansion, savings are required. If government operated along these lines, deficit spending during economic wouldn’t be required, because the treasury would have the savings imperative for spending, in anticipation of the next expansion.

    That said, I’ll take Hayek over Keynes every day. He understood socialism better than anybody, except for maybe Orwell. It is not the function of government to manage the economy. Provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare of society, and protect the citizens from fraud, those are legitimate functions of government. Let the market take care on the economy.

    Gawain's Ghost (b25cd1)

  16. I have listen to you deficit cassandras for 50 years and if I were still around 50 more years! Ever here about the boy who cried wolf? How much of the defense budget do you want to cut besides none. I know you will balance the budget by ending medicare for children instead.

    lany (2b70f4)

  17. https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/07/new-budget-deal-puts-final-nail-in-the-tea-party-coffin/
    Boooosh and Tarp – Obama and his stimulus. 2 morons who drove the bus over the cliff.
    And I give thee middle finger to Paulson.

    mg (8cbc69)

  18. TARP saved the economy, millions of jobs, and cost the taxpayers almost nothing in the end.

    Dave (1bb933)

  19. #6

    One thing I would like to see is less proclimations that Trump is a moron. He isn’t. When it comes to spending, Trump simply does not care, and he isn’t going to get in a futile fight with Congress about it, and maybe be forced to lose.

    It doesn’t mean the policy isn’t much different than what a moron would propose. It’s just that Trump has looked at the situation, and made a political judgement that isn’t stupid — if the political interests of Trump are the only consderation.

    Trump doesn’t do battle on issues relating to actual governance. That’s not what engages him about being President.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  20. Trump doesn’t do battle on issues relating to actual governance. That’s not what engages him about being President.

    …which makes him a moron, in my book.

    Dave (1bb933)

  21. #22 —

    And that will lead you astray in guessing what he might do. Also, it let’s him off the hook.

    He’s unfit. He’s not a fool. He is a narcissist to the n-th degree.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  22. Hey, wait a minute, there’s light at the end of the fiscal tunnel after all!

    Mr.Trump the President is going to save us $2.5 billion by taking three million people off food stamps. At $1.40 per meal, those gluttonous moochers are bankrupting our poor country, but our Glorious Leader Of The Free World will finally do something about it!

    nk (dbc370)

  23. He’s not a fool.

    I think there’s ample evidence that he’s a fool.

    His lizard brain is dangerous, to be sure. Being a fool doesn’t mean there’s nothing he does well.

    Dave (1bb933)

  24. At least the timing will help a potential GOP congress oppose spending on a potential dem president. that’s the only combination that has resulted in spending discipline recently.

    Time123 (b0628d)

  25. nk (dbc370) — 7/23/2019 @ 6:03 am

    our president mr donald also known as trump takes food away from poor people with head lice to pay tranny tatters to dance in the streets for us on the 4th of july which is why failmerica loves him so much

    Dave (1bb933)

  26. 1. Dave (1bb933) — 7/22/2019 @ 8:36 pm

    where you can try your hand at bringing down the debt through a combination of dozens of potential spending and revenue changes policy changes:

    http://www.crfb.org/debtfixer

    This probably ignoress interest rates and/or assumes that they will be whatever they will be. And assumes economic growth will be whatever it will be.

    Which means it is totally worthless.

    Ross Perot came up with a plan to eliminate teh deficit. It wasnt followed – but the deficit went down to zero.

    The way to reduce the deficit is economic growth. The way to get economic growth and prevent the deficit from skyrocketing is low, low interest rates.

    The way to reduce the federal debt is inflation.

    You need to find $7.8T in cuts or additional revenue over the next 10 years to stabilize the debt in 2029 down at “only” 70% of GDP.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c0a6)

  27. You need to find $7.8T in cuts or additional revenue over the next 10 years to stabilize the debt in 2029 down at “only” 70% of GDP.

    ZTotal nonsense, Economic projections over ten years are worthless.

    And everybody in Washington, D.C. knows it.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c0a6)

  28. Bailing out banks is not high on my list.

    mg (8cbc69)

  29. Gawain’s Ghost (b25cd1) — 7/23/2019 @ 1:38 am

    . It is not the function of government to manage the economy.

    There ae a couple of provisoons in the 1787 costitution that deal with managing the economy:

    Cogrss has he power to coin money, but states can’t coin money or emit bills of credit or make anything but gold or silver coin a tender in payment of debts.

    Sammy Finkelman (e4c0a6)

  30. I can’t believe the democrat party hasn’t hired you orange man bad fellas as their go to fellas on how to get Trump out of office by tomorrow. Perhaps tomorrow.

    mg (8cbc69)

  31. I can’t believe the democrat party hasn’t hired you orange man bad fellas as their go to fellas on how to get Trump out of office by tomorrow. Perhaps tomorrow.

    Getting Trump out of office tomorrow would put Pence, who is qualified to do the job and might be somewhat effective, in office.

    Why would they want to do that?

    Dave (1bb933)

  32. Didn’t you read the post, mg? If you did, you saw why. Trump bought them off with $2 trillion dollars.

    nk (dbc370)

  33. #32 —

    Which is why impeachment goes nowhere. Pelosi doesn’t want attention around impeachment or Mueller to exhume something that would require Republicans to screw up their courage and nominate someone else in 2020, or actually even convice Trump and install a President who might show what GOP governance (without Trumpian nonsense) would look like.

    Appalled (d07ae6)

  34. I wrote a post this morning decrying this budget deal and asking what the point of the Republican party is. Let’s move comments about the budget deal to that post.

    Patterico (115b1f)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2742 secs.