4 ms·
In discussions like this, it's worth reviewing where total government spending in the US actually goes. This is actually not the easiest thing to pin down, but
by avalys 4y ago
In discussions like this, it's worth reviewing where total government spending in the US actually goes.
This is actually not the easiest thing to pin down, but the best analysis I've seen is at https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year2022_0.html https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/year2022_0.html.
In summary:
17% to pension programs (e.g. social security)
23% to healthcare
19% to education
12% to defense
7% to welfare
3.6% to police/fire/prisons
4% to transportation infrastructure
14% to everything else (scientific research, the courts, the Department of Agriculture, etc.)
The US budget deficit doesn't come from overspending in any particular area, and there is no single fix that is going to get us back to parity. A focus on efficient spending and reducing waste might help, but it would need to be applied systematically across the entire government.
We are simply spending too much money everywhere, and getting too little value for the expenditure.
- sfe22 4y agoIsn’t this how empires fall?
- Axien 4y agoWhat is our defense relative to GDP?
- legitster 4y agoThis is a bit misleading though as it includes state spending as well. For the purpose of federal debt, we really only have three sources of spending that can move the needle: - Health Care 28% - Pensions 24% - Defense 20% Defense seems like an easy cut, but we are not currently in any major conflicts anyway. And our allies might not take to kindly if we start pulling bases from around the world. Pensions are entitlements and we can't really touch those. I think though that we are underrating the effectiveness of efficiency reforms around our healthcare system. For both private patients and taxpayers.
- gautamcgoel 4y agoI agree that our allies would not be happy if we started closing bases, but I think that is a small price to pay for fiscal responsibility.
- legitster 4y agoThe small price to pay would be millions of deaths and constant economic anxiety for upwards of a billion people around the globe. Alternatively we could raise taxes a little bit.
- TexanFeller 4y ago> we are not currently in any major conflicts anyway Disagree. The war with Russia has been slowly but steadily escalating and more directly involving NATO countries. It's not unthinkable it could turn into WW3.
- legitster 4y agoI don't disagree that it might very well escalate. But to the extent that the current conflict has already impacted our budget or the forecasted budget as outlined in the linked article I think is pretty negligible. My point was that we are unlikely to find any "easy" cuts in defense spending - and a major conflict could make us regret it.
- Andaith 4y agoYes it is. Russia is bogged down and unable to make any progress while fighting the poorest country in Europe, who is 1/3rd their size, has been equipped with whatever leftovers NATO was getting rid of anyway, and has conditions on using NATO tech to target Russia proper. There is zero chance of this becoming WW3. Any Russian escalation targeting NATO countries will likely be met with increased border defenses, possibly a no-fly zone, and giving Ukraine another 1% of defense spending collectively across NATO, but this time with all the long range missiles they want, the freedom to target Russia, and whatever aircraft NATO has in the back of the pantry...
- MuffinFlavored 4y ago> it's worth reviewing where total government spending in the US actually goes. Is it also worth reviewing 1. are we likely to ever increase incoming tax revenue (which loopholes stand to benefit the country's income the most without hurting it's citizens/economy/the businesses (and its employees who are basically the citizens) inside of it) enough to offset the debt-GDP ratio 2. if we are (or even if we aren't) going to increase taxation, are we going to lower spending in a significant manner or can we count on spending to pretty much stay the same or grow to offset the debt-GDP ratio so far in the past like, 15 years, we've shown we're going to keep taxes roughly the same and keep spending roughly the same (continue to grow it year over year) therefore we have no indication that we're headed towards anything but a debt/GDP ratio of 120-150% next 10 years, correct?
- shagie 4y ago> so far in the past like, 15 years, we've shown we're going to keep taxes roughly the same and keep spending roughly the same (continue to grow it year over year) I would like to bring that into question. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act_of_2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act_of_2017 > The CBO estimated that implementing the Act would add an estimated $2.289 trillion to the national debt over ten years, or about $1.891 trillion after taking into account macroeconomic feedback effects, in addition to the $9.8 trillion increase forecast under the current policy baseline and existing $20 trillion national debt. ... And of course the time between 2017 and 2023 has been great for the economy with improved revenue growth offsetting the reduction in taxes.
- scrubs 4y agoI hate to say it but yah. There is no institutional backbone in Congress anywhere to do course correct. If memory serves corp taxes are down about 20pct from Reagan while my W2 taxes are high. I've been in the apple building in Cupertino. Nobody really thinks it's Irish for tax purposes.
- TurkishPoptart 4y ago>19% to education Where does this go? In most counties, property taxes fund local schools. Public AND private universities are largely unaffordable without huge loans. Seems like most of this money is being squandered, with maybe a few billion going to decent NSF grants. Pre primary thru secondary education 152.2 0.0 7.3 789.9 949.4 [+] Tertiary education 481.3 0.0 292.8 49.7 823.7 [+] Education not definable by level 59.0 -112.0 80.6 13.3 40.9 [+] Subsidiary services to education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 [+] R and D Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 [+] Education n.e.c. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
- dragonwriter 4y ago> The US budget deficit doesn’t come from overspending in any particular area You are right, but even more, the US budget deficit doesn’t come from overspending at all. The deficit is about 2% of GDP. The US taxes at about 8.5% of GDP less than the OECD average. The US deficit is from undertaxing.
- SideQuark 4y agoBingo. And (as much as this crowd hates to admit it) the US undertaxes the middle class and poor to an incredible amount compared to other first world countries. OECD tax vs GDP [1] OECD rates US most progressive [2] (the rich pay more of the tax base, even when relative to their share of income). [1] https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/en/data-insights/tax-to-gdp-ratios https://www.oecd.org/coronavirus/en/data-insights/tax-to-gdp... [2] https://taxfoundation.org/news-obama-oecd-says-united-states-has-most-progressive-tax-system/ https://taxfoundation.org/news-obama-oecd-says-united-states...
- comte7092 4y agoYour second citation is pretty out of date, and it is pretty lacking in methodology. For instance, does it include payroll taxes? Because that would skew the data pretty significantly.
- SideQuark 4y agoOECD data includes payroll taxes (and all relevant taxes in each country). You can dig around on their site to find their tax data and methodology. If you don't like the date, also dig around on their site to find anything up to date you like. The point I made is correct - and it's well backed by the OECD databases.
- Rury 4y agoIt can be misleading looking at the budget this way. As to your last statement, they could cut the budget by a trillion, and still have 17% go to pensions, 23% to healthcare, etc. In any case, doing a comparison in percentage terms to other areas of spending won't indicate whether they are overspending in any particular area. There could be huge wastes in some categories.