register

posted by EducateGeorgia

In reply to: White House must be in parallel universe »

January 18, 2013

The key word in my original statement is "some."

"But guess what? We’re silly to worry about the deficit because federal spending is no big deal. At least, that’s what President Barack Obama says." The problem with this statement and the last paragraph is that it implies President Barack Obama as the only one being lackadaisical on spending when our former Vice President had said something similar. Plus, the work that the author cited paints a bigger picture.

It is interesting to note that in the first paragraph of the publication, Daniel Thornton states, "The U.S. deficit/debt problem began during the early 1970s when the government started to increase spending significantly without a corresponding increase in tax revenue."

As for the Boehner comments, we would have to take his word.

The average debt to GDP ratio since Obama took office is 9.2 whereas the healthcare to GDP is around 18%. Both debt and healthcare cost have been rising for decades.

As for Obama’s own debt commission, it was a bipartisan commission and this is what was actually stated in its entirety. “Decisions made over many years by both parties have created spending commitments that will rise faster than the economy or federal revenues can grow. Without a radical shift in policies, the gap between spending and revenues will continue to widen even after the economy recovers from the recession, as the baby boom generation retires, people live longer, and the cost of medical care continues to escalate. We will not be able to borrow at projected rates.” (Remember when Breitbart edited that Sherrod video?)

The 16th paragraph that starts with "The bulging deficit" really stood out to me. First, the word "laid" is throwing me off. Maybe coffee will help. Is he saying that the Pentagon didn't add to the deficit or that Pentagon isn't the only problem in concern with the deficit? I'm thinking the latter. Also, the second sentence in that paragraph doesn't tie in with each other. Yes defense spending has risen, and yes defense spending has gone down relative to GDP since the 1960's. But the correlation doesn't make much sense considering the fact of how the components of GDP is calculated. We import more than we should in a now global economy. The rest of the paragraph is confusing because some of those programs like Social Security and Unemployment Insurance are Mandatory Spending. If you work you pay into them.

Piggy backing on what the author cited, Daniel L Thornton stated this, "The large and persistent deficits over the 38 years preceding the financial crisis suggest that the United States would have had a serious deficit/debt problem without the financial crisis and recession. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that had the United States continued on the path it was on, the country would have achieved a debt-to-GDP ratio of 100 percent around 2017. The recent events merely forced the recognition of the reality of the situation sooner rather than later. Indeed, several economists and market analysts issued warnings of an impending debt crisis (see Gokhale and Smetters, 2003; Kotlikoff and Burns, 2012; and references therein)." The cited author undermines, in my opinion, the author's intention.

Now in summation, the author states, "Yet Obama fights every attempt to cut non-defense spending and on entitlement reform," is not true. The president, in his 2013 budget proposal, has numerous cuts and other reforms.

As stated above, "some" fact checking is required!

To see Daniel L Thornton article
http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/12/11/Thornton.pdf

Other resources
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/h...

Now I wrote this this morning so if anyone can dispute or correct me, please feel free. It was for RWE, but i guess the powers at be arent to happy with him right now.

Jump to This Reply »

Full Discussion:- Please Read The Terms of Service Before Posting:

 

Find us on Facebook & Twitter

Find us on Facebook Find us on Twitter

blogs

  • Andrew
    Shearer

    Blog: Can we please fix the Oscars?

    Summary:  Fun facts: The first-ever Oscar ceremony, held in 1929, ran a brisk 15 minutes. By contrast, the longest was in 2002, clocking in at a monstrous 4 hours and change. As usual, there are things I loved about it and things I didn't. Rather than be snarky or complain, I'll offer a few suggestions on how the organizers might bring the show into the 21st century. Fun facts: The first-ever Oscar ceremony, held in 1929, ran a brisk 15 minutes. By contrast, the longest was in 2002, clocking in at a monstrous 4 hours and change. As usual, there are things I loved about it and things I didn't. Rather than be snarky or complain, I'll offer a few suggestions on how the organizers might bring the show into the 21st century. First, a few thoughts on the winners: read more

  • Joe
    Johnson

    Winter storm drama

    Athens-Clarke County police officers responded to Pinewood Estates North on a 911 call concerning a heated domestic dispute. it reportedly was an argument over the lack of heat and food in a family's trailer and a woman was threatening to stab anyone who tried to take away her 7-month-old child. State patrol responded also, from their post nearby on U.S. Highway 29 North. The situation apparently was resolved. An officer reported he was driving the woman and infant to another home in Athens. read more

see more blogs