The one major take away from President Obama statement about the tax deal last night is that his push for deficit reduction is not over. He still thinks the deficit is “too high” and he is going to spend a lot more time try to get a “balanced” deal to cut it farther. From Obama’s speech last night:
The fact is the deficit is still too high, and we’re still investing too little in the things that we need for the economy to grow as fast as it should. [...]
I want to make this point: As I’ve demonstrated throughout the past several weeks, I am very open to compromise. I agree with Democrats and Republicans that the aging population and the rising cost of health care makes Medicare the biggest contributor to our deficit. I believe we’ve got to find ways to reform that program without hurting seniors who count on it to survive. And I believe that there’s further unnecessary spending in government that we can eliminate.
But we can’t simply cut our way to prosperity. Cutting spending has to go hand-in-hand with further reforms to our tax code so that the wealthiest corporations and individuals can’t take advantage of loopholes and deductions that aren’t available to most Americans. And we can’t keep cutting things like basic research and new technology and still expect to succeed in a 21st century economy. So we’re going to have to continue to move forward in deficit reduction, but we have to do it in a balanced way, making sure that we are growing even as we get a handle on our spending.
While the bully pulpit has its limitations when it comes to changing broad popular opinion, the President has significant power to set the narrative and priorities in Washington.
Obama could have declared victory with this deal. He could have said enough has now been done to reduce the deficit and it is time to pivot to more pressing issues. Instead, Obama declared this just one insufficient step in his push for deficit reduction and that he doesn’t expect to focus on anything else until more deficit reduction is approved:
We can come together as Democrats and Republicans to cut spending and raise revenue in a way that reduces our deficit, protects our middle class, provides ladders into the middle class for everybody who’s willing to work hard. We can find a way to afford the investments that we need to grow and compete. We can settle this debate, or at the very least, not allow it to be so all-consuming all the time that it stops us from meeting a host of other challenges that we face — creating jobs, boosting incomes, fixing our infrastructure, fixing our immigration system, protecting our planet from the harmful effects of climate change, boosting domestic energy production, protecting our kids from the horrors of gun violence. (emphasis mine)
He thus sets the stage for the fight he says he will not negotiate over: the debt ceiling, which should begin in about two months. He also expects the next round of deficit negotiations to begin when the sequestration delays end, around the same time.
In short, deficit hysteria will remain the singular focus of President Obama and the rest of Washington for the foreseeable future.
White House photo by Pete Souza




71 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
A lawyer who represented a client the way Obama has represented his base would not only be looking at a whopping malpractice verdict, but would also have some ‘splaining to do before a disciplinary committee of the Bar.
Well, Nero, we remember, fiddled while Rome burned.
There is historical precedent for this.
The precedent just isn’t Lincoln. No way. No how.
Rich people are running our Country and as a class are preternaturally stupid. Many will suffer before we change course.
Austerity is being implemented around the world and the U.S.A. already has a peasant class which will grow. If you make $4807 a week ($250K) you are not part of the middle class and clearly bringing in $7692/wk ($400k) puts you in the upper class. Bullshit Baffles Brains.
Agreed. Where is Ricky Ricardo when you need him?
Actually, and a lot of people don;t know this, Nero didn’t even play the violin (fiddle).
Historians claim he was playing pinocle.
You’re making an assumption about who Obama’s clients are.
The government pissed away over five Billion dollars PER DAY last month that it didn’t have. Most recently the Pentagon spent $247,000 on a float for Tuesday’s Rose Bowl parade in Pasedena, Calif. New government installations are springing up. Apparently there is no limit on government spending, despite what the ex-junior senator from Illinois says.
Please, everyone, be clear that “deficit reduction” is a synonym for “austerity.”
My rich republican sister and brother in-law just went on a cruise and are going on another one next week. They complain about paying taxes all time. They hate Obama but he best republican president they could ever have
Tax cuts for everyone (but the working class) mean spending cuts for social insurance programs. Isn’t that what Obama has been doing all along? Medicare is an earned benefit paid for through special taxes and is already means tested. To squeeze any significant money out of Medicare they plan to raise the % of folks who pay more from 5% to 15% (it is in the CAP plan). They are forced to cut into the benefits of the ‘real’ middle class in order to satisfy their deficits and cuts, mania. The CAP plan can be found here. Asking higher income folks to pay more can be found on page 22-23. Looking at 25 billion dollars in premiums.
The politicians have created the illusion of fairness, by claiming to have raised taxes on the wealthy, and now they feel that they have the rationale which they have sought to make significant cuts. The CAP plan looks for 380 billion in cuts and savings.
How many billions of dollars were just spirited away in making the Bush Obama tax cuts permanent?
You got that right.
This bullshit appeals to the idiots who think you run an economy the way you run the family budget. They don’t have to cut spending and reduce the Big Scary Deficit. They can pull money out of their figurative ass and essentially create it out of thin air. That’s the beauty of having control of your own currency and money supply. This country can never be Greece or an other EU nation. The phony deficit hysteria is to mask the transfer of more and more wealth from the bottom up to the top.
And the stupid fucks in this country are buying into the fallacious necessity of deficit reduction above increased spending for the present.
Happy New Year to ya!.
My only problem is what is “synonym” a synonym for???? :-)
That is because the rest of Washington drives how President Obama positions his argument.
Deficit hysteria persists because there is a multimillion dollar marketing campaign to the grassroots that keeps it alive. And that manufactured hysteria gets reflected in the communications that members of Congress get from constituents–and from their donors, who are not your ordinary citizens. President Obama is not going to expend political capital fighting that conventional wisdom that is all around him, including on his staff–even if he does not believe it himself.
There’s a subtle twist in the logic being used. The first premise, “The fact is the deficit is too high” is true. The second, that we are not investing in things to make the economy grow, is also true.
Then comes the pivot.”I agree with Democrats and Republicans that the aging population and the rising cost of health care makes Medicare the biggest contributor to our deficit.” Really? Is it? This is where the public needs to understand the budget. If this pivot is to leverage Medicare into Medicare for All, it would be forgiveable. But the reality of the Congress says that is highly unlikely absent a major change in the grassroots political culture all over the country.
And then the pivot back. “And I believe that there’s further unnecessary spending in government that we can eliminate.” Well, I trust that that will show up in the President’s budget. The best he could do on the sequester was essentially an across-the-board cut without picking winners and losers.
The next premise, we can’t cut our way to prosperity, is true. I’m surprised that he didn’t in the next sentence say “We can’t spend our way out a deficit.”, which is patently untrue. But he doesn’t. He lays out his initial principle in the tax reform fight. Corporations and the wealthy should not get tax breaks that ordinary people do not. And he strangely focuses on spending on basic research and technology as what has to be held harmless on the spending side. One wonders which basic research and technology he has in mind.
That is a three-decade old Washington narrative. It is the elite conventional wisdom. It is not taking the bully pulpit; its’ stating accepted Village facts.
The negotiation over the debt ceiling began two days ago. Don’t think it will be postponed for two months. In this case, it is in the institutional interest of the President not to have to deal with the debt ceiling, which is a phony constraint after all. It is in his interest to get it removed completely and forever. And it is in the institutional interest of Congress to dodge having to have their names associated on tax increases or spending cuts necessary to reduce the expansion of the debt. The good news: Joe Lieberman, Kent Conrad, Ben Nelson are not going to be around Congress to be fiscal concern trolls. They’ll likely be camped on on the Sunday morning talk shows.
So what external to Washington can derail public hysteria about the deficit and debt, which after all was correlated with the rise of the Tea Party?
Yep. Exactly. And “entitlement” is synonym for “the parts of the budget that we can’t meddle with by law”.
O= corporate sellout at home and war criminal overseas-the perfect “new democrat” pat pending
Medicare’s earned benefit covers HI only. Doctor and drugs are extra. All told, payroll taxes and fees cover about 25% of costs (today) and the rest is [well, you know].
If we aren’t talking about cutting Afghanistan and iraq contractors then we’re not really allowed a debate just a multiple choice BS spew stacked against us.
Cut the DAMN military back 50% and no more wars till the last ones are fully paid off.
After the so-called “cliff deal”: what’s next? that’s anybody’s guess at this point…anyone who is positive about what’s next is simply kidding him/herself….
I’d like to argue that point.
Can’t. But I’d like to.
Really disappointed in him.
Why not? Just cut and cut and cut and see if you can start a recession. Bet you can, bet you can, bet you can.
I have a rich friend and he and his wife complain endlessly as well. These people make 500K a yr. combined, but it’s not enough for them. They will retire with a combined pension of 250K a yr. and they both whine about how hard that’s going to be on them. I don’t get it?
I’ll second that. Let’s see if the MIC can build things rather than blowing them up. That oughta be a hoot.
Recession is good , more buying opportunities for them. The 1% made out great these last 5 yrs. compared to everyone else.
And it begins:
Watch for North Carolina to turn like Wisconsin and Michigan, but without the thousands occupying the state capitol.
I sure hope we don’t have another four years like the last four years.
Althouhgh I can’t think of one reason why not. And I’ve tried!
Yep. It’s called Corps of Engineers, and it is a hoot. Paying them to restore beaches for communities that never should have been built on barrier islands.
Don’t look at me. No “pensions” for either me or my wife. Just SS, a little savings, and our small horticultural project.
Shhhhhhh on the latter.
My grandpa was a supervisor with the WPA. He showed me many things they built, railroadsm parks, bridges. I think he called it….uh….oh, “infrastructure”. /s
And by ho much more would the deficit and debt have been cut if Obama hadn’t struck a deal with the GOP? If we had in fact “gone over the cliff.”
How thoroughly disingenuous.
Never heard that one. I like it. I’m a big Hal Holbrook fan. Well….you know what I mean.
The only thing I want to quibble with is your notion that the deficit is too high. It is not high enough IMO. Let me explain. Wigwam could do better than me, but I’ll give it a whirl since it is kinda important.
The MMT folks say the gov has to spend money into the economy first before they tax. So let’s say the gov spends 100. Then they turn around and tax 90. That is a 10 deficit and a 10 debt by the gov. But who has the 10. The private sector has it. They, you and me, have a 10 surplus bc we never paid it back to the gove.
So now year two. Same thing. Another 10 deficit and now the debt is 20. But who has the 10 or the cumulative 20? Right the private sector.
Now if you run this in reverse you will see that the private sector loses 10 each year. Where did they get it from? Their savings or Chase Bank.
Summary: A government debt/deficit is the private sector surplus (i.e. net finacial assets.) and vice versa. So we should really say the deficit and the debt is what the gov invested in the economy. That is what grows the economy and increases aggregate demand and employment. The reverse is also true.
We now have $16 Trillion of net financial assets from the federal gov.
There is one exception. We import more than we export so some of it “leaks” out. Also, this can cause inflation at full employment. Inflation, though, comes from other things as well like drought, monopolies, wars, bottlenecks, crony capitalism, etc.
So cut the deficit and you can cause a recession, I bet, I bet, I bet.
One of the other manuevers this administration has planned is moving severely and chronically ill dual eligibles, who are eligible for Medicaid and Medicare out of fee for service care and into managed care. They are promising to let the corporations who restrict their access to medical care under the new regs, keep up to 60% of the money which they did not spend on treatment for their patients. HERE. I think it is on page 10 and 11. There is already a lawsuit against this ‘dumping’ into managed care, in California. Folks got mad that they could not see the doctors who had been giving them treatment, specialists; and that they could not access treatment.
The Heritage Foundation will produce research such as:
“The Effects of Long Term Human Ingestion of Pet Food Products”. “Starvation, Homelessness, and Illness; Why Do The Hoi-Polloi Choose to Engage Such Practices?”.
“A Practical Argument For Adjusting The Minimum Social Security Eligibility Age to 85.”
“Why are The Masses Entitled To a Fully Subsidized Education, and Should Taxpayers Be Burdened With Such Wasteful Extravagance?”
So, you’re OK with the $13 trillion at present. Is there a number at which we should become uncomfortable because so much of our tax money is going to the debt?
(I’ve heard several people who supoprt the debt as a % of GNP. BUt at what point are we “in trouble” in your opinion.) You know I’m serious.
We have a new infrastructure investment going on here in NoTx.
Cost is estimated at $1.4B and planning, design and environmental studies took 40 years. Grandpa would spend a lot of time leaning on a shovel in today’s world.
Here’s a forbes article describing how Wellpoint (the folks who wrote the ACA bill) are buying up Medicaid delivery companies in anticipation of more managed care ‘penetration’ into medicaid and in anticipation of ‘dual eligibles’ patients.
I don’t know when, if ever, if becomes a problem. The Japanese have a debt of twice GDP and they have not turned into pumpkins and no one has come to collect. So I figure we are still ok. We have somewhere north of twenty million unemployed. The private economy could perk up, like borrow money during the housing bubble, and put them to work. But just now, no one wants to do that so it is necessary for the gov to step in and do it.
You know Wigwam, as I said, is an expert in this sort of thing.
Yeah, but everyone wants a nice tan and brother Sam loves the fishing out there.
40 years huh??????? Guess they didn’t want to overlook anythin’????
Plenty of politics involved.
Frankly you and wigwam impress me with all that you know and how well you can explain so even I can understand it.
$13 trillion still seems like a lot of money to me. I’ll just increase my medicinal dosage of red wine in the evening before dinner to compensate. (Doctor’s orders, really)
Trust you spell politic$$$ with three “$$$”.
If anyone anywhere has more than you, then you don’t have enough. Never mind that you have more than 99.9% of the country, or 99.99% of anyone who has ever lived. Envy and bitterness are all that matter.
Bullshite. GO peddle your recht-wing ignorance among the stupid.
I’m pretty sure you catch on to this stuff pretty quickly. I find it useful to remember that if I had a printing press, I would never have a problem with my bills. So how in hell can the gov?
I think he is just pointing out that greed knows no bounds, comrade.
And if we all did, the real winners would be people making suitcases instead of wallets.
Envy and bitterness toward those who have more than you? Totally alien concept, never heard of such a thing.
O no, not you. Just me. Not sharing is a virtue in this case.
Yes, I’ve said before if the government would just issue everyone a green Sharpie marker and tell us to add a zero to our current bills they wouldn’t even have to print new ones, we’d all be 10 times richer and all our problems would go away.
Recognize sarcasm much?
There are only three sentences there. Did you not read the second??
Yeah, but I want the Sharpie. None for you.
and Obama caves in 3 …. 2 ….. 1 .
Krugman is correct. We have a wimp. And regular people will suffer as a result.
As much as it is important that the US has its first bi-racial President, if we are honest with ourselves, Obama demonstrates horrible governance as a Democrat. I cannot discern one value that he would steadfastly hold. For political gain, there seems to be nothing he wouldn’t trade away!
I detest valuelessness. There is no stability in Obama’s governing. The ground under him is always unsteady and up for sale, cheaply too.
I’m glad I voted for Jill Stein. No guilt, or having to defend the indefensible. Congruence with my values, not in opposition to them–Unaffordable Care Act, NDAA, wireless wiretapping, drone killing increases, ignoring the Constitution. He’s been a governing nightmare for the most part, for me.”
It’s like Lake Wobegon. We will all be rich, eh?
In essence, he’s talking about redirecting spending and not cutting it. And it will be trickle-down economics with a smiley face that witless Democrats will insist is different from Republican/conservative economic theory.
And then he has the nerve to say this:
“Cutting spending has to go hand-in-hand with further reforms to our tax code so that the wealthiest corporations and individuals can’t take advantage of loopholes and deductions that aren’t available to most Americans…”
While the “fiscal cliff” policy resulted in this (3 points stand out):
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matt-stoller/eight-corporate-subsidies_b_2396559.html/
5) Subsidies for Goldman Sachs Headquarters:Sec. 328 extends “tax exempt financing for York Liberty Zone,” which was a program to provide post-9/11 recovery funds. Rather than going to small businesses affected, however, this was, according to Bloomberg, “little more than a subsidy for fancy Manhattan apartments and office towers for Goldman Sachs and Bank of America Corp.” Michael Bloomberg himself actually thought the program was excessive, so that’s saying something. According to David Cay Johnston’s The Fine Print, Goldman got $1.6 billion in tax free financing for its new massive headquarters through Liberty Bonds.
6) $9 billion off-shore financing loophole for banks: Sec. 322 is an “Extension of the Active Financing Exception to Subpart F.” Very few tax loopholes have a trade association, but this one does. This strangely worded provision basically allows American corporations such as banks and manufactures to engage in certain lending practices and not pay taxes on income earned from it. According to this Washington Post piece, supporters of the bill include GE, Caterpillar, and JP Morgan. Steve Elmendorf, super-lobbyist, has been paid $80,000 in 2012 alone to lobby on the “Active Financing Working Group.”
7) Tax credits for foreign subsidiaries:Sec. 323 is an extension of the “Look-through treatment of payments between related CFCs under foreign personal holding company income rules.” This gibberish sounding provision cost $1.5 billion from 2010 and 2011, and the US Chamber loves it. It’s a provision that allows US multinationals to not pay taxes on income earned by companies they own abroad.
Thanks. Just not in a mood for prole-sarcasm I guess.
Yeah, lets just say you accuse them of being hypocrites rather than liars. Maybe that’s what fouled me up.
I wish he was still the junior senator from Illinois, toiling in relative obscurity and doing less harm………. kind of a lesser evil thing.
Your family budget is exactly like that of the federal government, provided that your family runs a protection that demands payment in money that it prints. ;-)
Well said. Every word is true.
Naw, you’d still need an army to back up them thar bluedot-dolla’s. And this is the thing with all the righteous smart-asses throwing spittle at householder economists – in their mania they forget to mention the unfortunate defect that a “democratic” state is a good debtor. Sorta makes it understandable why they get so emotional.
The fraud is so thick it looks very likely that only a failure mode is possible – Libertarian poverty and Liberal slavery, conjoint.
Whatever happened to that guy who formed the “Rents is Too Damn High” party? He makes about as much sense as most of the pundits nowadays.
Obama is the President of the United States and as such represents the interests of everyone of We the People.
You need to learn the Constitution from liberals, not from Rush Limbaugh and Paul Ryan. It is sad to me as a boomer to see the evidence Justice O’Connor has seen and seeks to correct: a lack of civics education like I got in the 50s and 60s.
Uh, why is unmanaged care so great? Because it makes so many medical corporations profits? Results in doctor specialists getting very rich from the taxpayers? Gives them enough money to run for Congress as a conservative Republican?
I wonder why you don’t shop for cars like you believe health care should be delivered. You know, buy the car in pieces from dozens of different unmanaged car part specialists. That way you get a custom car that is just what you want and design because automakers like Honda and Toyota must be short cutting you in the cars they sell, missing lots of parts that obviously have to be good for cars, like jet engines, wings, kitchens and a full bath.
LINK
By your definition anything any President does is OK as long as it serves the interests of someone somewhere in the country. We should expect our elected officials to enunciate some principles when they run for office, and then govern according to those principles, on behalf of the general welfare and well-being of the people of this country, and in accordance with the Constitution and the laws of the land. They don’t get a free pass because someone somewhere benefits from something they do.
> My only problem is what is “synonym” a synonym for???? :-)
That’s easy: “equivalent word.”
wow. Thank you for the link. I didn’t hear about this until just now, and I stay pretty informed about health care issues. Guess that means, the “Administration” is doing this on the real down low. fuckers.