January 26, 2024

  • el
  • pt
  • Deficit Politics

    Bill Hobbs rightly notes that it is incorrect to speak of the deficit in absolute figures, if the issue is judging its size versus past deficits. He notes, for example, that as compared to GDP, the current deficits are smaller than those in the 1980s.

    And, as I pointed out months ago, the deficit last year, which also was touted in the press as the biggest in history, was not the biggest in terms of a percentae of budget outlays. It was slightly above average, but not radically so.

    Further, as I also noted at about the same time: like it or not, deficits have been the norm in Washington, not the exception. I am not fond of that fact, but it would be nice to have things in perspective before getting apoplectic. To act as if the surpluses of the later 90s were in any way the norm is to have a very limited understanding of history.

    Hat tip: James of OTB.


    Posted by Steven Taylor at January 26, 2024 03:49 PM | TrackBack
    Comments

    But today's deficits are offset by social security surpluses which were not present in the 80's. Remove those and the deficit numbers look awfully close to the Reagen deficits which were unheard of at the time.

    And those surpluses, which will be desperately needed in coming baby-boom retirement years, won't be available because powers that be in the white house & congress are, in effect, spending them.

    Posted by: Eric at January 26, 2024 05:01 PM

    to act as if the surpluses of the later 90s were in any way the norm is to have a very limited understanding of history.

    OK help me out... Did we really ever have a surplus? If so how many years?

    We had Clinton saying we would have surpluses for the next 20 years which was a completely goofy thing to say but did they ever really happen at all or was it just a Clintonian prediction?

    (yeah I could look but I figure somebody might know)

    Posted by: Paul at January 26, 2024 05:32 PM

    The "surpluses" were actually projected surpluses that -- like all administration -- assumed that conditions would remain rosy.

    In Clinton's case, the projections were essentially counting on the stock market and dot-com bubble to keep growing exponentially and never burst, that real growth would continue, that recessions were a thing of the past, and that elves and pixies would leave bundles of cash under the pillows of each member of Congress to pay for their projects.

    Ok, I made up the elves and pixies thing.

    Steven L.

    Posted by: Steven L. at January 27, 2024 07:53 AM
    Post a comment









    Remember personal info?