This just about ruined my damned day:
The Congressional Budget Office will release new budget forecasts Tuesday that will put next year’s red ink near $500 billion. Sinai’s own forecast put the figure even higher, as high as $535 billion. Absent any serious change in policy, private sector economists say deficits will remain in that range through the decade, then escalate sharply with the retirement of the baby-boom generation.
“I see absolutely nothing that’s going to bring the deficit back to balance in the foreseeable future,” said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor’s.
Ev Dirksen is rolling in his grave.
Dana
We have got to roll back Social Security. It was an ill-conceived, short-sighted program, and it’s going to bankrupt us unless our politicians develop a spine and admit that it’s not sustainable.
Sean
how about means-testing it and taxing incomes over $90,000 ? Along with putting in some checks on care of hopelessly ill patients and the really aged….an 88 year old with emphysema getting a hip replacement paid for by the fed govt when a 10 year old cant get vaccinations? flat out ridiculous.
Kimmitt
That was the plan all along, wasn’t it? Engender enormous tax cuts for the wealthy, then claim that it’s Social Security’s fault that the deficits are ballooning.
Pfeh.
JKC
Kimmit is correct. Blaming the current deficit on Social Security is absurd. You can’t make major tax cuts, add in a prescription drug benefit in Medicare, and pay for a war and expect the budget to balance.
Robin Roberts
Indeed, social security is outside of the budget deficits being discussed. But the tax cuts, which are not “for the wealthy”, are only a fraction of the reason for the deficits. This nation just spends too much money in government at all levels.
We need serious spending cuts.
Misanthropyst
See my trackback for one reason why I, after voting Republican for the last 20 years, am going to vote Democrat this cycle.
The other reasons? The Republican drive to financial foolishness and the dangerous breakdown of the separation of church and state.
Here’s hoping real Republicans return to influence in the party…
JKC
Robin-
Where do you want to cut?
John Cole
I am almost to the point where I would voter for a moderate Democrat- but the thing that keeps me from being able to do it is the Democrats.
Barring something spectacularly unexpected, I may be writing in some candidates this coming year.
DC
JKC,
Great question….should be asked by every person who wants to lead this country….and make them give specifics!
DC
Robin Roberts
JKC – everywhere. Including defense spending which is still bloated with pork ( such as keeping too many military bases open )
BigScaryBrain
I would never consider voting Democrat just because I am fed up with the Pack, the are after nothing but Democrat Lite. That would just make a bad situation really worse. But I would consider voting Libertarian.
David Perron
Ok, Robin, why don’t you now get specific with which bases ought to be closed? I’m not saying none ought to be closed, but let’s try to be specific here.
Military pork is rarely the fault of the military. I believe it was Trent Lott who pushed through some pet programs down in Mississippi, which the Pentagon did not want or need.
Dean
While the deficit is not because of Social Security/Medicare or entitlement programs, it’s worth remembering what the largest portions of Federal (and for the moment, that’s what we’re talking about, FEDERAL) spending are:
Debt service
Entitlement programs (primarily Social Security and Medicare, now to include a drug benefit as well).
Discretionary spending, in which defense spending is the largest single item (iirc).
So, IF you are serious cutting the budget, you can either cut back on SS&M (which will only expand further, as the baby boomers retire), OR you can cut discretionary spending. The problem w/ the latter is that, pretty soon, you’re chopping just about all of it, in order to keep pace w/ the growing demands from (1) and (2).
This is before you get into the “fast money” and “slow money” aspects of spending (i.e., how long it takes to spend a given sum, the difference between salaries and capital projects), pump priming, etc.
Kimmitt
Yeah, if we can’t keep the Fed solvent now, we’ve got absolutely no hope of doing so once the Boomers start retiring. Get ready either for double-digit inflation or for (shudder) defaults on Federal securities.
Steve
I’ve been bitching about this for sometime now.
Bush on Spending
Republicans for Smaller Government?
I have another one at my blogspot site…but that takes so damn long to load.
Steve
“how about means-testing it and taxing incomes over $90,000 ? Along with putting in some checks on care of hopelessly ill patients and the really aged….an 88 year old with emphysema getting a hip replacement paid for by the fed govt when a 10 year old cant get vaccinations? flat out ridiculous.”
Means testing is a bad idea, IMO. It punishes those who save for retirement.
A good place to start with Social Security is Larry Kotlikoff site.
Kotlikoff’s webpage
Of course, any serious attempt to change Social Security will get the Democrats Goon Squad out.
“Kimmit is correct. Blaming the current deficit on Social Security is absurd. You can’t make major tax cuts, add in a prescription drug benefit in Medicare, and pay for a war and expect the budget to balance.”
While this is true with the rising Social Security burden as well as Medicare either the programs will have to be supported with money from the income tax, or the payroll taxes will have to go up alot.
Economic Menu of Pain