Comments on: Fiscal Cliff, Three Ways

By: Misaki

Misaki — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 19:30:53 +0000

>That’s because absent new revenues from the upper-end sunset, you’ve got larger budget deficits.

This seems to be assuming that interest payments will make up more of tax revenues, and that no tax increases will occur… but… deficit spending will stay constant, meaning that non-interest spending decreases..?

It is really not clear what assumptions are involved here. If “current law” and “current policy” both ignore the debt ceiling, I am not sure how they end up with lower GDP 10 years from now using current policy.

Maybe it assumes that social security funds will run out of money and the government won’t borrow to make up the difference? The only other thing I can think of is resource depletion and I doubt they included that in the analysis.

Job creation without government spending, inflation, or trade barriers, and that would allow more focus on environment issues: http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/

By: Tyler Healey

Tyler Healey — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 23:54:56 +0000

“As I’ve stressed here at OTE, you want larger deficits in recession, but once the economy’s back on track, they should start coming down. If they don’t, at least as Mark scores it (as does CBO), growth is reduced.”

Why would growth reduce if we chose to not engage in the disastrous fiscal austerity (deficit reduction) currently being practiced in Europe?

By: Fred Donaldson

Fred Donaldson — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:59:46 +0000

A good austerity plan would examine why we continue to fund Pakistan, Iraq and Afghanistan with billions annually. The money is either blown to smithereens, stolen by their government leaders, pocketed in obscene profits by contractors, or we get benefits such as being charged $1,500 tolls for trucks to carry supplies and other similar ripoffs.

It really is time for corporations to pay their way in the global economy, not leave it up to minimum wage payroll tax payers here to shore up their interests in the middle east.

By: Bumpa

Bumpa — Thu, 14 Jun 2012 14:00:28 +0000

Question: Why the importance given to deficit reduction at this time? I don’t see it as a causing factor in the economic problems we are facing and, certainly not a factor that should be given priority. Better that we focus on 1/ rebuilding the infrastructure, putting people back to work (“creating jobs”) – 2/ develop a national high speed rail system that would rival the best the world has to offer, creating a whole new industry and revitalizing supporting industries – 3/ pull back on our commitment to an unending “war on terror” – 4/ tax the rich. Do these and the deficit will be taken care of. Pay off the deficit without doing these, and we will face an continued and worsening recession.