Economy
See other Economy Articles
Title: Super Committee Riven By Major Divide Over Basic Facts
Source:
Talking Points Memo
URL Source: http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/ ... jor-divide-over-basic-fact.php
Published: Sep 14, 2011
Author: Brian Beutler
Post Date: 2011-09-14 13:33:30 by nolu chan
Keywords: Super Committee, Joint Committee, Deficit
Views: 18267
Comments: 38
Super Committee Riven By Major Divide Over Basic Facts Brian Beutler | September 14, 2011, 5:59AM Political debates over deficits and debt are always marked by obfuscation and technicality. The numbers are huge and frightening, the terms obscure and technical, and the simple, fundamental point of the argument gets buried underneath this avalanche of panic and esoterica. But for a brief moment Tuesday, under questioning from Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Congress' top economic analyst made it perfectly clear to everybody who was listening. "I think really the fundamental question for you is not how we got here, but where you want the country to go, what role do you and your colleagues want the government to play in the economy and the society?" said Doug Elmendorf, who heads the Congressional Budget Office. He was addressing the six Democrats and six Republicans on the new joint deficit committee, and for three hours he did his best not to get buried under the same avalanche. "[I]f you want a role that has benefit programs for older Americans, like the ones we've had in the past, and that operate for the rest of the government like the ones we've had in the past, then more tax revenue is needed than under current tax rates," Elmendorf said. "On the other hand, if one wants those tax rates, then one has to make very significant changes in spending programs for older Americans" or all the rest of the government's functions. [snip]
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 8.
#1. To: nolu chan (#0)
(Edited)
I saw this in the NY Times this morning...they buried it on the National page...I found it to be one of the more important stories in the paper.
Brian Beutler | September 15, 2011, 6:10AM So did CBO Director Doug Elmendorf make any headway convincing Super Committee Republicans that a). the economy needs a short term boost of near term spending and tax cuts, and b). that the country shouldn't dive headlong, and unnecessarily, into austerity? If Dave Camp is any indication, the answer is no. The Michigan Republican, and chair of the House Ways and Means Committee said he disagreed with Elmendorf's cautionary testimony. "I think that one of the things we have to keep in mind is what we're charged with and the amount of debt reduction this represents in terms of our entire debt and how significant that is," Camp said. "As I said in my questioning of him, it's about three percent of outlays that we're looking at. It's about one percent of our GDP over the next decade. So I don't think that triggers the kinds of dynamics he was testifying to in other areas." Camp's back of the envelope math during Tuesday's hearing was based on the notion that the Super Committee will reduce deficits by one percent of this year's GDP every year for 10 years. However, as noted here, IMF economists recently warned that an austerity package of precisely that size will significantly increase unemployment and reduce wages. That's why Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) is starting a drumroll to require the panel to ask CBO to estimate the jobs impact of any of their proposals. [snip]
Maybe somebody, someday can explain to me how taking money out of the economy is a positive for growth.
That's what's is so great about economics. You can say whatever you want and use vague algebra to "prove" it...
There are no replies to Comment # 8. End Trace Mode for Comment # 8.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: war (#1)
Super Committee GOP Unconvinced By CBO Chief On Jobs, Austerity
#5. To: nolu chan (#2)
#6. To: war (#5)
Maybe somebody, someday can explain to me how taking money out of the economy is a positive for growth.
#8. To: nolu chan (#6)
Replies to Comment # 8.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]