It went largely overlooked yesterday, but the U.S. federal government ran a surplus in January of about $3 billion. These are rare but not unheard of, even in an era of large deficits, but it's the context that's notable -- as Republicans and pundits tell the public the government is spending far more than it takes in, we just wrapped up a month in which the government took it more than it spent.
Of course, that's only one month, though as Jed Graham noted yesterday, the fact of the matter is the federal budget deficit is currently shrinking at the fastest pace in modern American history. In fact, Graham described this as "the deficit chart that should embarrass deficit hawks."
Now, I think it's probably safe to say deficit hawks are no longer capable of embarrassment, so the chart's impact is likely limited. That said, there's a policy point to keep in mind: "Here's a pretty important fact that virtually everyone in Washington seems oblivious to: The federal deficit has never fallen as fast as it's falling now without a coincident recession."
Got that? Every time the nation has reduced the deficit this much, this quickly, economic growth suffers to the point that the economy actually shrinks.
Republican policymakers, who never met an economic truth they didn't forcefully reject, not only fail to feel any sense of embarrassment, they're also convinced that this reality isn't, well, reality. The GOP line is that the deficit is growing even though it's shrinking; that the nation's finances are deteriorating even through they're improving; and that the fastest deficit reduction in six decades that threatens the health of the economy should be even faster, regardless of the consequences.
It's quite unnerving, actually, to appreciate how unconcerned Republicans seem about the conditions they pretend don't exist.
Leave a Comment:
Except if they say it enough times, the faux news viewers will believe it; and, they sure won't hear anything different.
Even if the Faux News viewers realize that something there is not true, they will not hesitate to accept it if it is politically useful to them. The response the the quote above, "the deficit chart that should embarrass deficit hawks" is, How can you embarrass people who are incapable of shame?
Even if the Faux News viewers realize that something there is not true, they will not hesitate to accept it if it is politically useful to them
^ Accidently (i think), the above is the best explanation of *birtherism* i've ever seen.
Yep,. Jimmy Swaggart convinced his faithful followers that the Devil made him,. oops,. wait,.(sorry Geraldine) God,. made him do it(sexual addiction) so as to teach him to understand those in similar straits. THREE times!
Each time his following shrank a little,. but,. there where those who are still with him!
Oh for Pete's sake.
How about Jobs chart. Here, just take the one made up for Chris's show a week or so ago: We won't get back to 2008 employment until 2020. And even if we do that, that does not mean back to the same employment strength we had in 2008. Real restoration of strength to 2008 levels means both restoring the same employment to population ratio, and restoring the the income from those jobs to the same level.
Now, here is the super depressing point. Even though the real growth in jobs as compared to population is negative, the job growth at high incomes are negative, and all the job growth is at the low income jobs. Take a look at this chart.
It's a bad, bad scene folks.
I wonder how different that chart would be if we weren't so concerned with reducing a 0% interest debt..
The graph pages with citations and notes are:
Mr. Messerly,
I agree with your points, especially the concern about low-skilled jobs. However, please keep in mind the employment ratio statistic published by US-BLS is the ratio of those employed to all residents age 16 and older. (OECD uses employed divided by residents age 16 to 64, but is not an agency of the US government.)
Americans tend to work less or not at all above age 55. (women taking care of elderly relatives are especially prone to leaving the workforce in their 50's.) Yet everyone is counted as an 'employable' adult until they die.
The retirement of the baby boom will drive the (BLS) employment ratio down for the foreseeable future. If we were to return to 'full employment' in 5 years, the employment ratio will still be lower than it was in 2001.
(Which brings up the great fiscal crime of the Bush years, for US demographics of that time were better than any period in the past or future for running budget surpluses, but I digress.)
Yes, I think the BLS news release makes clear some of the headwinds we face. What is clear is that the lost 4.5% (delta between 2007 and 2011 EMRATIO [FRED graph]) is certainly not going to come back even with the most aggressive education program imaginable.
They do not attack the cause of the cannibalism of the middle class, and Clinton is certainly even less ideologically inclined to intervene, and even less for a GOP successor. So what does that leave us Obama 4 + Clinton 8 + GOP 4 years. 16 years of further slide of the middle class into oblivion.
We are doomed.
Check out the debt, per the US Treasury. At $3B per month it will only take forever to pay it off.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/index.html
You expect this deep deep hole to be filled overnight??
The Republicans intend to continue using the deficit and debt as campaign issues. But they do so at their own peril. Whoever wins the Dem nomination will have 8 years of falling deficits and debt under Obama to use against the Republicans who allowed Bush to run up both. The argument could be used in the 2014 elections and if it gets traction, then Republicans will have to reassess using it in the 2016 elections. If they lose that issue, then they have nothing to run on because the jobs issue will also bite them in the behind. They demanded austerity and budget cuts at the expense of jobs and their only solution to jobs is more tax cuts which would increase the deficit. Talking about budget cuts to entitlements is not a good strategy for elections. All of the main talking points for Republicans are going to put their candidate in a box.
And if we want the deficit to continue shrinking we have to get off our butts and vote in the mid terms. Some how we have to continue to gain seats in both the House and the Senate if we are to save this country from the economic ruin the GOPT would love to have.
" this as "the deficit chart that should embarrass deficit hawks."
Not in GOTP land where "reality" is what they say it is and not even TRUTH, FACTS or SCIENCE can break in!
NOW John Bonehead - where ARE THOSE JOBS, JOBS, JOBS?!?!
Those numbers are skewed because that January receipts are up by the fact that employers are withholding more because the tax holiday is over. Economists still say that we are on track to clear 1 trillion again this year in deficit.
Yeah, inspector w/a bazillion numbers - that's called a revenue stream, and it does help buy down our current deficit! By your comment, I can't tell if you believe this is a good thing - your ill-temperament has gotten in the way of what you need to say:
We are going in the right direction, and if the House Republicans don't insist on continuing to blow it, we can be even better off if they'd simply bring some of the additionally needed legislation up for a vote every once and awhile! -Kevo
Kevo
When the revisions for Jan. come out next month we can see what the numbers really are. You can bet that Benen will not retract anything. He will just add another spin cycle and go from there. Spending (according to the latest numbers) have not fallen nearly enough to stop the train to financial ruin for our kids. I say let the sequester happen then cut from there. The US government wastes more money each day. You can call it "investments" if you would like. Take the stimulus for instance, Did We really need a $2500.00 sign to say that Obama is the "great guy" that made it possible to replace the bridge on route 68 south of Wilmington Ohio? The answer is emphatically NO. Just replace the darned bridge and put that $2500.00 toward the next one. While we're on that subject, we've replaced over 75 bridges in Afghanistan And we can't seem to find the money to replace the one on I75 that crosses the Ohio river. This government wastes up to 50% of each dollar it spends and nobody on the left or right seems to care. Tell me again Kevo, are we really going the right direction?
Nearly all of what is wrong with the US is directly attributable to those on the right, but the trolls will never admit their strategy of destroying the US economy so they can blame it on the President.
inspector w/bn - Ok, you got me on that factoid about Afghanistan!
Boy, once when I was a bit younger, actually a whole lot younger, I put an apple and an orange in a vacuum sealed plastic bag!
I've learned over the years not to do that again! Thank you inspector w/bn for your forthright response. I learned quite a bit! -Kevo
Kevo
Okay you lost me, How is money wasted not money wasted? In other words (your words) Apples and oranges.
When the economy is tanking, spending by the government, even on a sign you disapprove of, puts money into the economy and allows someone to continue paying their bills. But you knew that already, didn't you?
By the way, when will we be privileged to see the opeds/letters to the editor you wrote denouncing GWB's refusal to raise taxes for Afghanistan, Iraq and Medicare Part D? Or, if you're old enough, the ones where you denounced St. Ronnie for his deficits?
I think I'll get a drink as this may take some time...
The Bridges of Afghanistan
Bridges are a small fraction of the expenditures made. Below you will find a link with a breakdown for the 2002-2009 period.
http://afghanistan.usaid.gov/en/about/frequently_asked_questions
Doug
My letters were more primal than asking to raise taxes. They were about the fact that we should not have been there in the first place. Same with Iraq. We should have only used spec.ops. This theory has been proven effective by the Isrealis. The fact that we are doing anything in Afghanistan at all as far as using tax payer dollars is totally rediculous. As soon as we are out of there they will ruin everything we payed for. What a great "investment". Liberals on the other hand have no problem with spending other peoples money. It just makes them "feel" better and they say well at least we did something. Well that is a total load of yack squeeze. We can no longer afford for liberals to "feel good".
You talk about the jobs created by Obama having these signs, Okay that was short term employment for sign painters. What are they doing now?
Investment is when you outlay funds and hope like heck that you make money from it. I can see very little in the way of "investment " In the constant, seemingly endless amount of pork that is attached to every bill that comes out of Washington.
Adam
The first chart shows that at least 25% of the money wasted in Afghanistan was for roads. That includes bridges. (not a small fraction) USAID still has no Idea how much money was embezzled by Afghan polititions and warlords. All the GAO can say is Millions of dollar.
inspector12-6837443
The 25% was for the 2002-2007 period. Page down in the graph for 2008 and 2009. You will see that the total for roads for 2008 was 17% and for 2009 about 6%. Since bridges are only a portion of the expenditures for roads, they remain a small fraction compared to more egregious expenditures.
In case readers might think these bridges are all replicas of the Golden Gate Bridge - I include a link. Note - the construction of roads and bridges was not really to help the Afghan people. Paved roads reduced IEDs and paved roads and more substantial bridges increased the speed of US troop movement.
Still plenty of other expenditures to complain about - many will not be a total waste. When the Chinese build their pipe line across Afghanistan and move in hundreds of thousands of troops and their families to protect that pipeline - they will surely appreciate the many improvements we have made.
http://www.khaama.com/china-discuss-turkmenistan-gas-pipeline-with-afghanistan-551
http://www.isaf.nato.int/article/isaf-releases/afghans-soldiers-team-up-to-build-a-bridge.html
http://thediplomat.com/flashpoints-blog/2011/04/03/new-roads-afghan-success/
As George W. Bush used to say, governing is h-a-r-d. If he'd been any good at reading charts we wouldn't be in this fix today. We would have known enough to maintain Bill Clinton's tax regime or improved on it. I'm afraid the current crop of Republicans is no better at reading charts than George W was. I guess it's too h-a-r-d. (obamasay.com)
Would be better shared with a more SEO- and human eyeballs-friendly decontextualized headline...
just sayin', y'all should know better. I fixed it when I shared it, but no one else will.
It's not as if Republicans actually gave monkey's about the debt or deficit. What they do care deeply about is fearmongering about the debt and deficit as a means to eliminating all social programs.
The thing is, a double-dip recession heading into the mid-terms would be just what the DC Republicans ordered. Of course the DC Republicans would never intentionally tank the economy for political benefit.
Or maybe, keep on GOP keep on doing nothing. Let the democrats continue to handle matters.