5 ms·

A not-insignificant part of that deficit though was programs and tax cuts from the previous administration. I agree, our government probably shouldn't be allowe

A not-insignificant part of that deficit though was programs and tax cuts from the previous administration. I agree, our government probably shouldn't be allowed to spend money it doesn't have, but the obvious solution (higher taxes, especially on the wealthy) isn't politically palatable, so every president is locked into the same pattern: start a bunch of spending, but back-load the actual expenses so the next administration has to deal with it. The deficit has gone down over the last few years, which means that we're getting more revenue and saving some money, but because deficit is an easier number to digest than change-in-deficit, we keep whinging about it rather than changing anything. And then the next administration comes in and points fingers at the previous while continuing the cycle of overspending. FWIW the current administration and Congress have done a historically slightly-above-average job of reducing the deficit, I won't call it good but it's at least not terrible. The current spending isn't the problem, it's stuff from a few years ago coming to bite us in the ass.

ihalip 3y ago
How do tax changes from a few years back affect the current deficit? Shouldn't they be already "priced in" the budget?
willcipriano 3y ago
The deficit is down from the highs of the pandemic spending. That's like saying the deficit is down post WW2 and taking credit for it.
- piva00 3y ago
  Looking at the graphs for US Budget deficit since 1980 there's a clear pattern to it, Republican administrations tend to increase it (or maintain in percentage-to-GDP), Democrats tend to lower it: Carter: year|deficit|increase|deficit-to-GDP 1977 $54 $78 2.6% 1978 $59 $73 2.5% 1979 $41 $55 1.6% 1980 $74 $81 2.6% 1981 $79 $90 2.5% Reagan + Bush Sr.: 1981 $79 $90 2.5% 1982 $128 $144 3.8% 1983 $208 $235 5.7% 1984 $185 $195 4.6% 1985 $212 $251 4.9% 1986 $221 $302 4.8% 1987 $150 $225 3.1% 1988 $155 $252 3.0% 1989 $153 $255 2.7% 1990 $221 $376 3.7% 1991 $269 $432 4.4% 1992 $290 $399 4.5% Clinton: 1992 $290 $399 4.5% 1993 $255 $347 3.7% 1994 $203 $281 2.8% 1995 $164 $281 2.1% 1996 $107 $251 1.3% 1997 $22 $188 0.3% 1998 ($69) $113 (0.8%) 1999 ($126) $130 (1.3%) 2000 ($236) $18 (2.3%) Bush Jr.: 2000 ($236) $18 (2.3%) 2001 ($128) $133 (1.2%) 2002 $158 $421 1.4% 2003 $378 $555 3.3% 2004 $413 $596 3.4% 2005 $318 $554 2.4% 2006 $248 $574 1.8% 2007 $161 $501 1.1% 2008 $459 $1,017 3.1% 2009 $1,413 $1,885 9.8% Obama: 2009 $1,413 $1,885 9.8% 2010 $1,294 $1,652 8.6% 2011 $1,300 $1,229 8.3% 2012 $1,077 $1,276 6.6% 2013 $680 $672 4.0% 2014 $485 $1,086 2.8% 2015 $442 $327 2.4% 2016 $585 $1,423 3.1% Trump: 2017 $665 $671 3.4% 2018 $779 $1,271 3.8% 2019 $984 $1,203 4.6% 2020 $3,132 $4,226 15.0% 2021 $2,772 $1,484 12.1%
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    There was what? 5 years in the past 50 that there wasn't a deficit? Those 5 years were when the internet went mainstream and lifetime welfare was ended. The rest of the time is occupied by bipartisan wars that we couldn't afford and lost anyway.
    - IggleSniggle 3y ago
      I think when they made that comment they were talking about the rate of change, ie, whether % of GDP is trending upwards or downwards, not specifically looking at the Clinton administration.
      - willcipriano 3y ago
        If you want to dig further into it GDP is adjusted by the GDP deflator and that is lower than CPI. Due to (intentional) methodological flaws like hedonic quality adjustment, owner imputed rent and a basket of good arrived at by a team of economists rather than surveys of what households are actually buying, CPI is lower than what a household needs to increase its budget by in order to stay afloat, it's lower than inflation. Therefore if the government engaged in deficit spending and that spending resulted inflation that would result in a better percentage of GDP than expected as a lot of the "growth" is just dollars becoming less valuable.
    - piva00 3y ago
      > The rest of the time is occupied by bipartisan wars that we couldn't afford and lost anyway. Started by Bush I and Bush II. > There was what? 5 years in the past 50 that there wasn't a deficit? My observation was in the rate of change of the deficit, generally since the 80s Democrats seem to work for lowering the budget deficit while Republicans increase it. Which is quite absurd given the demagogy coming from the GOP about public spending, "welfare queens", austerity and so on, they are mostly the ones responsible for pushing future administrations (and generations) the burdens of their overspending.
      - 3y ago

ihalip 3y ago

How do tax changes from a few years back affect the current deficit? Shouldn't they be already "priced in" the budget?

willcipriano 3y ago

The deficit is down from the highs of the pandemic spending. That's like saying the deficit is down post WW2 and taking credit for it.

piva00 3y ago
Looking at the graphs for US Budget deficit since 1980 there's a clear pattern to it, Republican administrations tend to increase it (or maintain in percentage-to-GDP), Democrats tend to lower it: Carter: year|deficit|increase|deficit-to-GDP 1977 $54 $78 2.6% 1978 $59 $73 2.5% 1979 $41 $55 1.6% 1980 $74 $81 2.6% 1981 $79 $90 2.5% Reagan + Bush Sr.: 1981 $79 $90 2.5% 1982 $128 $144 3.8% 1983 $208 $235 5.7% 1984 $185 $195 4.6% 1985 $212 $251 4.9% 1986 $221 $302 4.8% 1987 $150 $225 3.1% 1988 $155 $252 3.0% 1989 $153 $255 2.7% 1990 $221 $376 3.7% 1991 $269 $432 4.4% 1992 $290 $399 4.5% Clinton: 1992 $290 $399 4.5% 1993 $255 $347 3.7% 1994 $203 $281 2.8% 1995 $164 $281 2.1% 1996 $107 $251 1.3% 1997 $22 $188 0.3% 1998 ($69) $113 (0.8%) 1999 ($126) $130 (1.3%) 2000 ($236) $18 (2.3%) Bush Jr.: 2000 ($236) $18 (2.3%) 2001 ($128) $133 (1.2%) 2002 $158 $421 1.4% 2003 $378 $555 3.3% 2004 $413 $596 3.4% 2005 $318 $554 2.4% 2006 $248 $574 1.8% 2007 $161 $501 1.1% 2008 $459 $1,017 3.1% 2009 $1,413 $1,885 9.8% Obama: 2009 $1,413 $1,885 9.8% 2010 $1,294 $1,652 8.6% 2011 $1,300 $1,229 8.3% 2012 $1,077 $1,276 6.6% 2013 $680 $672 4.0% 2014 $485 $1,086 2.8% 2015 $442 $327 2.4% 2016 $585 $1,423 3.1% Trump: 2017 $665 $671 3.4% 2018 $779 $1,271 3.8% 2019 $984 $1,203 4.6% 2020 $3,132 $4,226 15.0% 2021 $2,772 $1,484 12.1%
- willcipriano 3y ago
  There was what? 5 years in the past 50 that there wasn't a deficit? Those 5 years were when the internet went mainstream and lifetime welfare was ended. The rest of the time is occupied by bipartisan wars that we couldn't afford and lost anyway.
  - IggleSniggle 3y ago
    I think when they made that comment they were talking about the rate of change, ie, whether % of GDP is trending upwards or downwards, not specifically looking at the Clinton administration.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      If you want to dig further into it GDP is adjusted by the GDP deflator and that is lower than CPI. Due to (intentional) methodological flaws like hedonic quality adjustment, owner imputed rent and a basket of good arrived at by a team of economists rather than surveys of what households are actually buying, CPI is lower than what a household needs to increase its budget by in order to stay afloat, it's lower than inflation. Therefore if the government engaged in deficit spending and that spending resulted inflation that would result in a better percentage of GDP than expected as a lot of the "growth" is just dollars becoming less valuable.
  - piva00 3y ago
    > The rest of the time is occupied by bipartisan wars that we couldn't afford and lost anyway. Started by Bush I and Bush II. > There was what? 5 years in the past 50 that there wasn't a deficit? My observation was in the rate of change of the deficit, generally since the 80s Democrats seem to work for lowering the budget deficit while Republicans increase it. Which is quite absurd given the demagogy coming from the GOP about public spending, "welfare queens", austerity and so on, they are mostly the ones responsible for pushing future administrations (and generations) the burdens of their overspending.
    - 3y ago