One of the better articles and the best chart from the Congressional Budget Office I’ve seen concerning the fiscal cliff and the effect it will have on jobs. The most important factor to note here is the difference in jobs with the two different Bush tax cuts options. We’ve been led to believe by the GOP that the tax cuts for the alleged “job creators” (a.k.a. the wealthy but not technically job creators in the U.S.) are critical and our economy cannot move on without them. But, as the author of this article puts it, “Washington is haggling over the least stimulative part of the fiscal cliff — the Bush tax cuts for the rich” (emphasis added). Obviously, Republicans are showing they are not serious about deficit reduction as they continue to block this maneuver. The question now becomes: will the GOP cause another recession just to get their way on the most insignificant part of the fiscal cliff debate?
A good but very generalized argument against the amount of spending cuts proposed by the Paul Ryan budget. An important fact to keep in mind from the piece:
According to the World Bank, government spending minus health care was already lower in the United States than in all of the European Union, Japan, China, and India in 2009, the latest year with comprehensive figures.
Many people probably think the opposite is true with the perception of the bloated United States’ government but it simply isn’t reality. What level of spending is best is arguable and some great points are made by Altman on this but one thing is clear judging from history. The government can contribute to some areas of the economy in a more efficient and better way than leaving it to the forces of the market. We should always recognize that and know we will need certain areas run by the government in the interest of society as a whole or we will lose something we currently take for granted, whether it is security, transportation efficiency, safe food, etc.