Click for more charts from these folks.
If you find yourself home for the holidays and arguing about the fiscal cliff, try these two charts. First, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows how we got all this red ink. Simply, the Bush tax cuts did it. Letting go of the tax cuts for the rich would save $950 billion in deficits over the next decade, the Center says. It's worth reading their whole post.
The chart below comes from North Dakota Senator Kent Conrad, a Democrat. First posted by our pal Ezra Klein, it shows the level of tax revenue during the last five budget surpluses. We're five percentage points, give or take, below that now, and we're broke.
Click for WonkBlog's year in graphs.
Leave a Comment:
That's a pretty chart with green bars, but remember that the surpluses 98-01 were a result of removing all the surpluses from the social security funds. If that had not happened, social security would be solvent for the next 100 years. Thank you Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich.
There are SS and Medicare trust funds, the surplus when there is one is loaned to the US government. We need to let the payroll tax cuts expire. The trust funds draw interest. Let all those tax cuts expire and cut defense spending and quit giving all the money to big banks and big businesses. The Military-Industrial Complex must be reigned in. We need to stop Crony Capitalism, and the revolving door where congressmen go from congress to lobbying. We could cut waste and fraud from Medicare and Medicaid. Let Medicare bargain for lower drug prices. There are a lot of programs that can be cut without hurting the middle and bottom classes. I know that my benefits have been cut since Reagan and they are taking another slice this year through Medicare premiums and prescription co-pays. They could cut the child bearing subsidy by cutting the tax credit for having children. There are many things that can be done and the rich will still be rich. The rich have done very well in the great recession. I feel confident that Warren Buffet and the Walton's will do just fine, as well all the other billionaires.
And just think, whatever the Democrats don't give away today, or tomorrow, or the next day, they'll be forced to give up in the upcoming Republican "Fiscal Ceiling" frothing-at-the-mouth hissy fit - lest they seem "unserious" to the MSM clown show.
"Unpossible", you say?
In DC, the degree of how serious your seriousity is about all things deficity and fiscal cliffy, is never demonstrated by tax increases, or any actual cuts to the military, or any other real causes of any deficit problem(s).
NO!
It's how many of the poor, the old, the sick, the disabled, women, blah, brown, red, and yellow, bodies you can throw onto a pyre of fire to appease the God's of Austerity and Debt Reduction!
Dja ever notice, how no one ever says a word while Republican adminstrations are out there, increasing deficits?
They only scream when the Democrats can't fix the problems caused by Republicans, fast enough.
The Republican dog got fat, so the Democat's cat has to go on the diet.
Oh for Pete's sake.
Breaking news: Republicans refused to vote for a tax increase, but waited a few days to vote for a tax cut, with the expectation that those who elected them to office would not notice their perfidy.
Move along, nothing to see here folks... Move along.
All this nuts coverage of the fiscal cliff boils down to this simple principle. That is all that is at work here. Sure there are other forces to comment on, but nothing- nothing trumps this elementary proposition.
As for the predictable retrospective this evening of the news year: Instead of the mocking of the political process, let's have some self examination of the failure of the media. For example- the fixation on the spectacle of the presidential race which turned out to be nowhere near as close as the media suggested it was (despite the polling data)- At the expense of covering the more boring and numerous House races whose fate would not unsurprisingly dictate another 2 years of legislative fiascos.
YeeGawd the smug self congratulatory atmosphere on Lawrence's show last friday was depressing. Hopefully tonight some pundits will be a little bit more honest about the lost opportunities of Christmas past- the death of the old at the solstice, and the birth of the new. Hopefully they will be honest about their own fate of Christmas future and contribute some honest good action in this Soltice present.
We are between times. Our actions in this present determine the trajectory between which world of the past and which world of the future we are on.
WIthout confrontational honesty among commentators, our trajectory will continue as it has been.
Dystopia- sharper income inequality, global climate change calamities making Sandy look like a picnic, indifference to the slaughter of innocents with high powered weapons....
Speak up. Be less confirmatory, more willing to challenge prevailing memes, and more willing to risk your 7 figure salaries so that you can do the work that the profession of journalism demands of you.
Who gives a shhit at this point? Obama is going to piss away any advantage he has, piss away his election victory, piss away all the work people did to get him elected, and march in a straight line the Republicans have drawn for our Jellyfish-in-Chief.
And I thought I was grumpy this New Years eve.
OK Disgusted, here's a cup of holiday cheery optimism for what happens:
Regrettably, the most likely contenders for 2016 are far far to the right on any of these policies. Whether we change that trajectory is up to us, not them. What happens in 2016 will be decided in this year and the next. By 2014, the die will be cast.
Not appreciated annotating things that will never come to pass with our Republican President. REALLY not appreciated. Please stop it. I'm not amused. I predicted this going just the way it is, hoping beyond hope that I was wrong. Frankly I just want to vomit right now.
*Gently pats Disgusted*
It's ok, I understand your frustration, completely. I have little faith in our elected officals, myself, but I'm still rooting for the President to win out. (I'm not being sarcastic.)
How about we just drop this, and stop gretzin' over it? Let's have a party and get happy before we step off the cliff, eh? *breaks out Prince - "1999"*
It will hurt less, and maybe there will be something for the hangover in the morning, ok? You never know...we'll be here to pick you up, either way.
Peace.
Seriously, if all you can think about is not being discomfited when you're getting ready to be sold out YET AGAIN, then by God, please go get run over. You are part of the problem. There comes a time when enough is enough. And now, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
I am not ready to jump on the Disappointment Express quite yet. There were many opportunities for Dems to do major legislation in the first two years of Obama's presidency. If he did not have to contend with Blue Dogs and "Droopy" Lieberman, there could have been a lot more work done. However, that does not excuse the president and Dems from pursuing the torture issue and the massive frauds by Wall Street and the banks. These issues could have been dealt with through the Justice Department. In retrospect, tax fairness should have been the big issue rather than the health care bill, but he did accomplish a major item that will become a building block for more health care changes in the future. These changes may not happen for a long time since voters are weary of the health care battle.
There are promising statements by the president that may well point to a more confrontational second term. If Obama does not roll over on the tax and debt ceiling issues, it should confirm the end of the appeasement of the right wing. We will have to closely watch the budget and deficit battles that will occur after these skirmishes. What the president does with entitlement "reform" (an euphemism for destroy in Republicanspeak) is going to be the test of how progressive the president really is in relation to the liberal wing of the Dem party. I will withhold my pessimistic statements until the tax and debt ceiling issues are resolved. But I sincerely hope the Dems make politics a contact sport again for progressives.
Disgusted,
You are right! And it is NOT Obama who is going to fix this for us - he's a part of the "system" that exists right now and he has to work within that "system"!
It is up to us to change the "system" - we need the activism that we had in the 70's.
WE need to march on Washington in a big enough force to convince them that "ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"!
WE have to get rid of Citizens United and we have to take back our government so that it isn't just a pawn for corporations.
WE need to STOP and REVERSE the income inequality that has happened in this country.
WE need to break the back of the "Tea Party" whose only purpose is to protect the extremely rich in this country - meaning WE need to target those Congressmen who are up for election and find and support in any way we can, politicians from the middle class!
One of the things that we seem to have these days is a belief in our "powerlessness" - WE have to OVERCOME that belief and see what WE can do!
And here is one thing you can take to the bank: There is NOBODY out there but WE to do it!! And WE are going to have to do it without any money because no one who has money is going to help us!
Now, how do WE start?
Look, if Obama rolls over now, we know what we have. We know exactly what we have. A pussy.
And he's simply going to lose all his support. Nobody will believe a damn thing he says. There's already reason to believe you can't believe anything he says when it comes to standing up to Republicans. Frankly, I just don't think I can go on supporting him if he caves this time. I'll be too Disgustedwithitall.
Barack Obama on extending the high end tax cuts (for $250,000): "I won't do it again."
Gun control after that? Climate change after that? Standing up to banks after that? Any serious proposals discussing or coming to terms with the inverted wealth function this country has after that?
Nobody will believe a damn word he says and nobody will be willing to go to the mat for him. I won't. I most certainly won't.
@oncearepublican: If somehow, someway it could get organized -- with actual organization and not like OWS -- I'm all in for the march. I'm all in for the fight. And what makes me SICK to my stomach is cowardice and irresoluteness. Like Obama and his idiot advisers are showing.
What a bunch of gutless wonders. Totally in their power to not let a fire get stated. They assume it will be a small fire and they will put it out as soon as it gets started. Let's see how fast this fire gets out of control and what it takes to put it out. They're like kids playing with matches.
"Simply, the Bush tax cuts did it. Letting go of the tax cuts for the rich would save $950 billion in deficits over the next decade"
That is only 0.095 trillion per year, to put it in the same scale as the graph. Those who blame the Bush tax cuts for the problem but only want to roll back a small portion of the cut are being intellectually dishonest.
There is truth to that. Based on the chart, all of the Bush tax cuts should be allowed to expire. Easiest way to do that is to "go over the cliff".
I was not hurting economically under Clinton's tax rates. I have no reason think that returning to them would hurt me now.
Well yes and no. The reason why we don't want to remove the below 250,000k tax cuts at this point in time is because we're still coming out of the recession. The idea is to not hit the middle class until the economic growth situation has reached at least 6% unemployment. But it is true that without repealing all of the tax cuts, ending both wars, and without the recession ending we are going to see a deficit no matter what. I don't think Democrats have been dishonest in attempting to push for the over 250,000k tax increase because this is the hardest thing to get done and once this is done it won't be as difficult to eliminate the rest of the Bush tax cuts later on. Not to mention this is currently the only area where we can make up revenues until the recession ends and the War in Afghanistan ends. Unfortunately most of the predictions have stated that the recession likely won't completely end in terms of unemployment until 2016. So we're looking at a few years with the Bush tax cuts still in place. I don't think Democrats have been proposing that increasing the taxes on incomes above $250,000 per year will eliminate the deficit. But I do think they've been proposing that this is the best cost-control measure we have until we're out of this giant hole that we're currently stuck in.
The problem is is that the under $250,000 W tax cuts shouldn't be made PERMANENT like our Republican President Obama is insisting. They should be tied to economic growth or, better, unemployment.
Agreed DWITA
I love how the Maddow Team prepares it's viewers with weapons to do battle with our Republican family members.
Thanks!!!!
Gee, our politicians are making sausages in public view again!
They can talk all they want about this fiscal cliff stuff, but how much is us little guys going to get screwed again by these rich people? All things ever seem to go for is the rich and now they worry about going off the cliff it is a little too late for that.
Its the republican way create a crisis then whine that the other side didn't stop them, even though they do everything in their power to make sure the other side can't stop them. It goes all the way back to Ronnie the living dead Reagan loudly yelled the "buck stops here" then when it came time for the buck to stop he passed it off to a fall guy.
What is so frustrating to me is that we talk about returning to the pitifully low tax rates of the Clinton administration as if it's some kind of radical idea. It's NOT. Increasing taxes on the rich from 35% to 39.6% is NOTHING.
The world average is around 50%. It was 70% prior to Reagan (you know, BEFORE we measured our debt in TRILLIONS). Can't we, I dunno talk about at least raising taxes on the rich to 45%?
I notice that the biggest contributor to the deficits in dark brown are the Bush era tax cuts which everyone is/was trying to keep as part of the compromise to the fiscal cliff. The only difference between the two parties is the upper 2% taxpayers (which will generate only $ 160 Billion a year). So how anyone can think that "preserving" the biggest contributor to the deficits is going to fix anything is just silly.