Neither party is serious about spending
To continue this thought experiment, if this inflation- and population-adjusted spending path from 2001 continued to 2022, spending in 2022 would be only $3.61 trillion, compared with the $5.51 trillion the current baseline predicts. This spending path would have seen budget deficits top out at a little less than $400 billion in 2009 and then return to surplus by 2014.
In fact, even starting from today’s spending levels, if future spending grew at inflation plus population, it would be only $4.8 trillion in 2022. The budget deficit in that year would be $199 billion, with deficits decreasing each year.
Compare this to President Obama’s proposed fiscal-cliff deal, which would increase spending to $5.5 trillion in 2022, the same as the current baseline. That’s right: The president’s proposal does not reduce spending at all. There are no net cuts, not even in the Washington sense of reductions from the baseline. The few programmatic cuts he recommends, most of which lack specifics, are offset by other spending increases. All that spending means that, if the president gets every bit of the $1.6 trillion in new taxes he has asked for, we would still add $6 trillion to the national debt over the next ten years, and run a $661 billion deficit in 2022. Moreover, since there are so few specifics in the president’s proposal, these estimates likely underestimate the amount of spending, debt, and deficits it would incur.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Of course not. They, for the most part, are establishment tools. These “cuts” they are talking about are cuts to mandatory increases in spending. So instead of increasing our spending @ 10% they increase it to 4%. Rand Paul had a good statement about this reality.
MoreLiberty on December 6, 2012 at 3:58 PM
Few Americans care. They won’t care until they are personally affected, harshly.
The bad part is that those affected will probably cry for more Statist government.
chimney sweep on December 6, 2012 at 3:58 PM
McConnell ran for re-election last time bragging about how much pork he brought to KY.
Wethal on December 6, 2012 at 4:08 PM
That’s the assumption behind Cloward-Piven. Destroy the system, and when people are in a state where they’ll accept anything just to make the pain stop, give them communism. And most will take it.
The Rogue Tomato on December 6, 2012 at 4:10 PM
Good.
Let it burn.
Rebar on December 6, 2012 at 4:20 PM
yup
conservative tarheel on December 6, 2012 at 4:27 PM
Republican politicians are a special CLASS of people and they deserve to have the power of spending other peoples wealth creation.
Time to end the Republican party. Black list the progressives.
astonerii on December 6, 2012 at 4:34 PM
On the contrary, they are very serious about spending.
Dante on December 6, 2012 at 5:04 PM
Probably the first truthful thing you’ve said in years. Keep it up!
MelonCollie on December 7, 2012 at 10:38 AM