The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Right? Left? Centre?
Political news and debate.
Put your views and articles up for debate and destruction!
rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by rubato »

_______________________________
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... em/265408/


The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem, We Have a Distribution Problem

Nov 19 2012, 12:06 PM ET 19

Forty years from now, America will be twice as rich on average as we are today. But most of that wealth will go to the very richest households. We only have a budget crisis if they refuse to pay higher taxes.

615 rich poor Gina Sanders shutterstock.jpg
Gina Sanders/Shutterstock

In this season of fiscal silliness, many people are saying that we cannot afford our current entitlement programs. They shake their heads solemnly and say that Social Security and Medicare were well-intentioned ideas, but we simply do not have the money to pay for them and there is no escaping the need for "structural changes."

Hogwash.

Yes, federal government spending on Social Security and particularly Medicare is projected to grow, as a share of the economy, over the next several decades. That's because our population is aging and health care is becoming more expensive. As a result, spending on entitlement programs is growing faster than tax revenues. This creates the perceived need to cut spending, most notably in Paul Ryan's plan to convert Medicare into a voucher program--whose vouchers are designed not to keep up with actual health insurance costs.

This kind of cost-cutting doesn't do Americans any good. Health care is something people need. If the government pays for less of it, then either seniors will pay for it directly, and we'll simply have shifted costs from taxpayers as a whole to the elderly--or seniors won't be able to afford it, and we'll have balanced our budget on their backs.

More fundamentally, it's a mistake to fixate on the federal government's budget and ignore the aggregate budget of the American people. The federal government exists to serve the American people, not the other way around. The real question is whether we as a society can afford our current level of entitlement spending.

The answer is obviously yes.

This chart shows real per capita GDP--the total value of all goods and services that we produce, divided by the population--as projected by the CBO. (The data are from the supplemental tables to the CBO's June Long-Term Budget Outlook.)

Image

Because this is per capita GDP, it already takes into account the fact that a growing share of the population will be retired. And because it is real (inflation-adjusted) GDP, it already takes into account the fact that everything, including health care, is getting more expensive.*

In other words, in the future, we will be able to afford all the health care we consume today, plus all the other stuff we consume today, and then some. That means that, for example, seniors can enjoy the same level of health benefits that they enjoy today, and the rest of us can still be better off than we are now. And it isn't even close. Forty years from now we will be, on average, twice as well-off as we are today.

The key words in that sentence are "on average." As a society, we will produce far more than enough goods and services to preserve Social Security and Medicare in their current form without making younger people worse off. But these programs will consume a growing share of total societal resources, and since they are administered by the federal government, that requires higher taxes.

So the real point isn't that we can't afford Social Security and Medicare. It's that some people don't want to pay the higher taxes necessary to maintain Social Security and Medicare. This is a question of distribution, pure and simple.

At first blush, it may appear that young people don't want to pay for retirement benefits and health care for old people. But most of us will be both young and old at different points in our lives, so we're on both sides of the transfer. The real issue is that Social Security and Medicare are risk-spreading programs, which means that rich people** end up subsidizing poor people.

When people say that we can't afford our entitlement programs, they're really saying that rich people won't pay the taxes necessary to sustain our entitlement programs. To be fair, many rich people probably would be willing to pay higher taxes if they knew the facts. But a small number of extremely rich people have successfully spread the myth that we can't afford our entitlement programs.

Decades ago, Congress decided that anyone who worked for ten years, and his or her spouse, deserved a basic level of health insurance. If they deserved it then, there's no reason they won't deserve it in the future. And as a society, we can easily pay for it. The reason we're talking about cuts to Social Security and Medicare is that some very influential people don't want to pay for it--and they've convinced everyone else that we can't pay for it.

______________

*The Consumer Price Index, the most common measure of inflation, calculates the change in the price of a fixed basket of goods and services. If real per capita GDP is bigger in one year than in the previous year, it means that the average person can buy the same amount of goods and services as the year before and have money left over.

** That is, people who turn out to be rich after the fact. Most people do not know, when they enter the workforce and begin making payroll tax contributions, whether they will turn out to be rich or poor.
_____________________________________


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Gob »

Shall we take it as read that you endorse the sentiments in this article then? :D
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by rubato »

Is that more interesting than reading the article and trying to understand what it says?

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Gob
Posts: 33646
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 8:40 am

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Gob »

Yellow cheesecake Sentient marrow.
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

Is that more interesting than reading the article and trying to understand what it says?
LMAO :lol: :lol: :lol:

Since when did you become a fan of that?

Between that and the bit where you claim to be a big fan of empirical evidence, I can only surmise that you're putting together a new comedy routine....
ImageImageImage

User avatar
MajGenl.Meade
Posts: 21464
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 8:51 am
Location: Groot Brakrivier
Contact:

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by MajGenl.Meade »

“The white man knows how to make everything, but he does not know how to distribute it”

Sitting Bull (Tȟatȟáŋka Íyotake)
For Christianity, by identifying truth with faith, must teach-and, properly understood, does teach-that any interference with the truth is immoral. A Christian with faith has nothing to fear from the facts

dgs49
Posts: 3458
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:13 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by dgs49 »

The collossal ignorance encapsulated in this essay is stunning.

Clearly, this ignorant twit is gunning for a seat in the Obama cabinet. I can just picture every fucking economist in the U.S. (who, by the way are unanimous in believing that the coming crisis in SS and Medicare funding is potentially catastrophic), collectively striking their foreheads, a la Homer Simpson, and exclaiming, "Why didn't I think of that?"

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

The author of the article's name is James Kwak....

Which I assume is pronounced "Quack"....

Anyone who thinks our debt problems can be meaningfully addressed simply by raising taxes high enough on "the rich" is engaging in a level of simple mindedness equal only to those who believe that goal can be achieved by politically unfeasible spending cuts...

The only way to make any significant reduction in our debt is through economic growth.
ImageImageImage

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by rubato »

dgs49 wrote:The collossal ignorance encapsulated in this essay is stunning.

Clearly, this ignorant twit is gunning for a seat in the Obama cabinet. I can just picture every fucking economist in the U.S. (who, by the way are unanimous in believing that the coming crisis in SS and Medicare funding is potentially catastrophic), collectively striking their foreheads, a la Homer Simpson, and exclaiming, "Why didn't I think of that?"
Actually economists are nearly unanimous about Medicare funding becoming a crisis but in fact almost none of them think that of SS.

yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

Actually economists are nearly unanimous about Medicare funding becoming a crisis but in fact almost none of them think that of SS.
I believe rube is actually correct about that...

Everything I've seen on SS suggests that the prevalent view is that with some relatively minor tweaking, (like gradually raising the eligibility a couple of years to 67, and/or means testing benefits at the top income rates) it can be kept solvent well into the future.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Long Run »

Still, it is a nearly $6 trillion present value deficit. It would take adding about 2.7% to the payroll tax, now, to make it solvent for the next 75 years; and, of course, you can make adjustments to the wage base, the benefits, etc. to reduce the 22% increase in the tax. Since we can expect D.C. to dither, the cost to fix it will go up each year. And note, that the 22% and growing payroll tax increase is on all earners. Simplistically stating that just rich people can cover the $6 trillion deficit is mind-numbingly ignorant.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by rubato »

Long Run wrote:"... Simplistically stating that just rich people can cover the $6 trillion deficit is mind-numbingly ignorant.
I would guess that is why he does not say that. Nor anyone else I can think of. But it remains true that tax cuts on the rich are a large part of the deficit and allowing them to expire is an essential part of the solution. We have been borrowing close to $300 billion a year since 2002 mostly to give to the rich. That tactic failed to produce economic expansion (as it has before) and I would suggest that we stop repeating a failed experiment.

The largest part of the <<deficit>> is a result of the economic collapse, the wars in Iraq and Iran Afghanistan (sorry), and Bush-era tax cuts. Without those three it is not especially alarming:

Image

yrs,
rubato
Last edited by rubato on Wed Nov 21, 2012 7:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Long Run »

So the real point isn't that we can't afford Social Security and Medicare. It's that some people don't want to pay the higher taxes necessary to maintain Social Security and Medicare. This is a question of distribution, pure and simple.

At first blush, it may appear that young people don't want to pay for retirement benefits and health care for old people. But most of us will be both young and old at different points in our lives, so we're on both sides of the transfer. The real issue is that Social Security and Medicare are risk-spreading programs, which means that rich people** end up subsidizing poor people.

When people say that we can't afford our entitlement programs, they're really saying that rich people won't pay the taxes necessary to sustain our entitlement programs. To be fair, many rich people probably would be willing to pay higher taxes if they knew the facts. But a small number of extremely rich people have successfully spread the myth that we can't afford our entitlement programs.

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

Beat me to it Long Run....

He bitches about people not reading an article that he himself didn't bother to read.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

Not the first time that's happened, and I'm sure it won't be the last... :lol:
ImageImageImage

oldr_n_wsr
Posts: 10838
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:59 am

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by oldr_n_wsr »

We have been borrowing close to $300 billion a year since 2002 mostly to give to the rich.
I still have a problem with the way this is worded.
I don't believe we have been borrowing money to give to the rich. The rich do not get a check over and above their earned income. What we have been doing is borrowing to fund the government when we might have funded it ourselves if we taxed people more (be them the rich or poor).

Saying we give the rich money we borrowed is a poor way of stating the situation.

rubato
Posts: 14245
Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 10:14 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by rubato »

Long Run wrote:
So the real point isn't that we can't afford Social Security and Medicare. It's that some people don't want to pay the higher taxes necessary to maintain Social Security and Medicare. This is a question of distribution, pure and simple.

At first blush, it may appear that young people don't want to pay for retirement benefits and health care for old people. But most of us will be both young and old at different points in our lives, so we're on both sides of the transfer. The real issue is that Social Security and Medicare are risk-spreading programs, which means that rich people** end up subsidizing poor people.

When people say that we can't afford our entitlement programs, they're really saying that rich people won't pay the taxes necessary to sustain our entitlement programs. To be fair, many rich people probably would be willing to pay higher taxes if they knew the facts. But a small number of extremely rich people have successfully spread the myth that we can't afford our entitlement programs.

He says that we can afford specific entitlement programs, Social Security and Medicare, with higher taxes on the rich. He does not say that higher taxes on the rich alone will eliminate the deficit (which is not 6 trillion dollars). Which is what you accused him of saying. Your statement was a wildly hyperbolic straw man.


yrs,
rubato

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

I still have a problem with the way this is worded.
I don't believe we have been borrowing money to give to the rich. The rich do not get a check over and above their earned income. What we have been doing is borrowing to fund the government when we might have funded it ourselves if we taxed people more (be them the rich or poor).

Saying we give the rich money we borrowed is a poor way of stating the situation.
It's sophistic and intellectually dishonest, but there's a bigger problem with it....

In order for the math of "tax cuts cost X" to add up the way many, (including rubato) want it to add up, you have to assume that tax cuts provide absolutely nothing in terms of economic growth which is utterly preposterous...

You have to assume the exact same rate of economic growth over a period of time and represent the tax cuts as nothing but a complete take-away from the treasury....

The evidence, (which has been posted here before in great detail; rube just chooses to ignore it as he does anything that doesn't match with his pre-conceived ultra-simplistic views of things) is that there has been a clear relationship between tax cuts and increased economic growth following every major tax cut since JFK's in the early 60s.
ImageImageImage

User avatar
Long Run
Posts: 6723
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Long Run »

LR:
Still, it is a nearly $6 trillion present value deficit.
Rubato:
the deficit (which is not 6 trillion dollars)
I stand corrected; the current estimate of the deficit is $8.6 trillion.
The newly released 2012 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the
Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Federal Disability Insurance
Trust Funds indicates that the Social Security trust fund exhaustion
date is three years earlier than projected in the 2011 Trustees Report.
The trust fund is projected to run out of assets during 2033, and
if reform has not been enacted by that date, benefits would have to be
reduced by about one-fourth thereafter.

The present value of the shortfall (between assets, including
income, and benefits, including expenses) estimated over the
75-year period of the forecast, increased from $6.5 trillion in 2011
to $8.6 trillion in 2012.
The shortfall increased from 0.7 to 0.9 percent
of the gross domestic product (GDP) and increased from 2.1
percent to 2.5 percent of taxable earnings over the same period.

The 2012 report showed that to eliminate the projected deficit
(using best estimate assumptions) some combination of an
immediate increase of 2.61 percentage points in the payroll tax
rate or an immediate decrease of 16 percent of benefits would be
required. The same numbers from last year’s report were a 2.15
percentage point increase in the payroll tax rate and a 14 percent
decrease in benefits.
http://www.actuary.org/files/SSC_IssueB ... 120501.pdf

User avatar
Lord Jim
Posts: 29716
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:44 pm
Location: TCTUTKHBDTMDITSAF

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Lord Jim »

Long Run, I believe the miscommunication here, is that you are talking about the long term deficit liability of the Social Security Trust Fund....

Where as rube is just talking about the standing overall deficit per se....(which at last count was 16 trillion and counting...)

You are attempting to make a more complex, specific, and knowledgeable point than your interocular is capable of grasping...

A course of action, which I can tell you from long experience, will lead to nothing but frustration.... 8-)
ImageImageImage

Andrew D
Posts: 3150
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 5:01 pm
Location: North California

Re: The U.S. Does Not Have a Spending Problem

Post by Andrew D »

For clarity's sake, I suggest using terms this way:

"Deficit" refers to the budget deficit -- the amount by which expenditures exceed revenues in any one fiscal year.

"Debt" refers to the national debt -- the total amount which the US owes to all of its creditors.

"Liability" refers to the amount which any program or combination of programs is expected to have to pay over some stated period of time.

I think that using the terms that way would make it much easier for the rest of us to follow along.
Reason is valuable only when it performs against the wordless physical background of the universe.

Post Reply