It’s the Spending, Stupid: A Crucial Historical Look at Federal-Government Spending

Article by Paul G. Kengor

It’s the Spending, Stupid: A Crucial Historical Look at Federal-Government Spending – Society – Politics

Search by Author, Title or Content

Article ContentAuthor NameArticle Title

Home
Submit Articles
Author Guidelines
Publisher Guidelines
Content Feeds
RSS Feeds
FAQ
Contact Us

We have failed to heed the lessons of economic history, with terrible consequences for our economy and country. And the most crucial of those lessons, particularly since the start of LBJ’s Great Society, is this: deficits have been caused not by a lack of income-tax increases but by recession and, most of all, by excessive government spending.

The failure to learn that lesson is again on painful display, as President Obama travels the country pointing the finger at “the rich” for not forking over enough income. By this narrative, the 36 percent income-tax rate paid by the wealthiest Americans is somehow robbing the poorest Americans, whose income-tax rate is zero percent; something one would never know from Democrats’ class rhetoric.

Because I comment on this topic so frequently, especially in the context of Reaganomics, I constantly deal with these issues from a historical perspective. Here, I would like to make it easy for everyone to see the numbers themselves and understand the root of the problem.

The answers are as easy as googling the words “historical tables deficit.” Two sources pop up: CBO historical tables and OMB historical tables. “CBO” is Congressional Budget Office; “OMB” is Office of Management and Budget. These are the official go-to sources for data on deficits, revenues, and government expenditures.

Either source will work. To keep it simple, I’ll focus on the OMB numbers. At the OMB link is Table 1.1, titled, “Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits: 1789-2016.” That is an official scorecard of spending by the federal government since the founding of the republic.

Looking closely at the chart is an eye-opening experience. As the first two columns show, receipts (i.e., revenues) and outlays (i.e., expenditures) moved up and down throughout our history. In 1965, however, something historically unusual, something literally deviant, began: Spending increased every single year, non-stop, consistently, without exception, into the Obama presidency, from 1965-2009.

There are few constants in the universe: gravity, the sunrise, the oceans, the moon. Add another: spending by the federal government; it rises every year.

Significantly, revenues don’t increase every year. The most dependable reason for declines in revenues is not a lack of tax increases, or high enough income-tax rates, but recessions. Since 1965, as the data shows, annual revenues declined seven separate times.

At the start of the Great Society, in 1965, revenues and expenditures were nearly equal, with expenditures only slightly higher, leaving a manageable deficit of .4 billion. By 2009, however, annual expenditures (.5 trillion) had far outpaced annual revenues (.1 trillion), leaving a record deficit of .4 trillion.

Significantly, the biggest one-year drop in revenues was from 2008-9, when they declined from .5 trillion to .1 trillion. Worse, President Obama and the Democratic Congress responded with an 0-billion “stimulus” package that didn’t stimulate. In other words, they responded in the worst way: with another 0 billion in government spending. That further mushroomed the record deficits/debt we face. The math is very simple.

Government spending, which has hampered growth rather than sparked growth, caused this fiscal crisis.

It is crucial to realize that this spending addiction is a new thing in American history. Previous generations of politicians showed much more restraint. Prior to 1965, expenditures were not following an ever-upward trajectory; expenditures decreased year-to-year frequently, nearly two-dozen times between 1901 and 1965, even during the administrations of big-government liberal presidents, like Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt.

This changed in the mid-1960s, when the federal government began a serious spending problem.

How do we communicate the crisis to the wider public, beyond charts and data?

I suggest comparing the situation to a household: Your family’s annual revenue has probably not enjoyed a 40-year-plus consecutive increase. For some years, you were paid less. Perhaps you lost a job, took a pay cut, or switched jobs. Maybe your spouse was laid off, or left work to have a child. You bought a house one year, another 20 years later, spent a ton of money on your children’s college education, lost on a bad investment.

I doubt your family’s yearly revenue has been a steady upward climb since 1965. Life obviously doesn’t work that way.

And yet, imagine if each successive year, without fail, you spent considerably more money than the previous, including money that isn’t yours. You added debt each year, creating massive debts for your family and children. You paid taxes with a credit card.

How long would this go on before you ended up with a credit downgrade or in jail? Get the picture?

If President Obama and the Democrats don’t, they should. Warren Buffet certainly should. Our fiscal crisis is due not to insufficient income taxes but uncontrolled, undisciplined spending.

To paraphrase Bill Clinton’s 1992 campaign slogan, “It’s the spending, stupid.”

About the Author

Dr. Paul Kengor is professor of political science at Grove City College, executive director of The Center for Vision & Values, and author of the newly released Dupes: How America’s Adversaries Have Manipulated Progressives for a Century. His other books include The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism and God and Ronald Reagan.

Use and distribution of this article is subject to our Publisher Guidelines
whereby the original author’s information and copyright must be included.

Paul G. Kengor

RSS Feed

Report Article

Publish Article

Print Article

Add to Favorites

Article Directory
About
FAQ
Contact Us
Advanced Search
Privacy Statement
Disclaimer

GoArticles.com © 2012, All Rights Reserved.

Find More Cut Government Spending Articles

Romney on spending: Guns triumph over butter as Pentagon boost ensures domestic cuts

Article by Strongcrusher

Romney on spending: Guns triumph over butter as Pentagon boost ensures domestic cuts – Business – Product Reviews

Search by Author, Title or Content

Article ContentAuthor NameArticle Title

Home
Submit Articles
Author Guidelines
Publisher Guidelines
Content Feeds
RSS Feeds
FAQ
Contact Us

Differences over the government’s budget and spiraling deficits are among the starkest that separate Republican Romney and Democratic President Barack Obama. Obama’s budget generally avoids risk, with minimal cuts to rapidly growing health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid while socking wealthier people with tax increases. It’s all part of an effort to close trillion-dollar-plus deficits.

Romney, by contrast, proposes broad cuts in government spending, possibly overpromising on reductions that even a Congress stuffed with conservatives might find hard to deliver.

His campaign materials give relatively few specifics, other than a pledge to bring total government spending down to 20 percent of the U.S. economy by the end of a first term in 2016. That is roughly in line with where it was during Republican George W. Bush’s presidency.

Estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office put current government spending at .6 trillion, or about 23.5 percent of the gross domestic product this year, slipping to 21.8 percent by 2016.

The math can get fuzzy. But the Romney campaign says it needs to come up with 0 billion in cuts in 2016, the target year. Overall, Romney promises to shrink the government by about one-seventh when compared against the size of the economy.

The GOP front-runner suggests raising the Social Security retirement age and reducing cost-of-living increases for better-off retirees.

He generally endorses a plan by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., to gradually transform Medicare from a program that directly pays hospital and doctor bills into vouchers for subsidizing future beneficiaries in buying health insurance.

Because Romney promises to protect current Social Security and Medicare recipients from cuts, he cannot get much savings from those programs by 2016. Combined, they are projected to make up about 44 percent of the budget that year. Interest costs, which cannot be touched, would make up an additional 9 percent of the budget, while Romney promises to add almost 0 billion to the Pentagon budget that year, based on his pledge that military spending reach 4 percent of GDP.

So what’s left to cut?

–MEDICAID: The program now provides health care for about 50 million mostly poor and disabled people, including nursing home care for 7 of 10 patients nationwide. Obama’s health care law sharply would sharply boost Medicaid enrollment to cover more people above the poverty line, a move that Romney promises to repeal.

About the Author

Grinding Mill Manufacturer

Mining Equipment

Use and distribution of this article is subject to our Publisher Guidelines
whereby the original author’s information and copyright must be included.

Strongcrusher

RSS Feed

Report Article

Publish Article

Print Article

Add to Favorites

Article Directory
About
FAQ
Contact Us
Advanced Search
Privacy Statement
Disclaimer

GoArticles.com © 2012, All Rights Reserved.

The Bush Taxes Cuts Did Not Force the Obama Administration to Spend Trillions of Dollars

If one were to quit and look at the index charts, index charts, information, and results, they would understand that it’s all poppycock. The actuality is that Chief executive Authorities in the first two decades in office has used three times as much as Chief executive Shrub in all eight-years he was president.

It seems regrettable that so much of the community considers the fight cry of the Authorities Supervision, and takes the generous media’s term for everything without looking at the reality of the matter. Indeed, the Authorities Supervision needs to quit accusing Shrub already, and please note: The Shrub Tax Reduces Did Not Power the Authorities Supervision to; Invest Billions of Us $ $ $ $ that they didn’t have, or to always gain access to invest in a lot of absurd community applications.

Further, it seems that the Authorities Supervision wants the extremely panel to improve taxes on the U.

S. citizens, particularly the vibrant People, and they say that will help stability the govt funds. That’s definitely difficult, the only way to do fix the funds disaster with increasing taxes would be to improve the taxes on the complete middle-class improve, remove the Shrub tax cuts, and improve the National taxes to the point they are in The western union. If you know anything about the taxes in the European Partnership you will understand that our normal of life and quality living in the U. s. Declares is much more effective, and our taxes are considerably cheaper.

Not only that, but our medical care system is also better, and anyone who can manage it in the EU efforts to seek the services of personal physicians, rather than interacting with what the state has offered. Perhaps surprisingly enough, all of the Conservatives got together in a latest GOP controversy for the 2012 presidential elections in Wi. The Conservatives were requested if any of them would improve taxes to help match the govt balanced-budget, and at a 1 to 10 rate, all of them said no. In other terms, they said if the administration cut , they would not take a one dollars improve in taxes for every cut.

Why do you think this is? It’s simple really, the Conservatives don’t like what the Dems are investing the cash on, or the errant expenditures of these community applications, which is Chinese suppliers says is a; Debt Blast. The actuality is the Shrub tax cuts did not force the Authorities Supervision to shell out trillions of $ $ $ $ , the tax cuts were put in place to avoid socialist management from investing our treasury into oblivion. Unfortunately the Dems did that anyway, they used cash they didn’t have, cash they realized they didn’t have, and didn’t seem to care about the long run repercussions. Please consider all this and think on it.

 

Find More Obama Cuts Military Spending Articles

Government Spending Cuts And The Economics Of Money And Banking

Article by Doug Remington

President J. F. Kennedy had a great economic adviser, Walter Heller, from Columbia University. In 1960 Heller was making ,000 a year working for Columbia University, and he took a cut in pay to ,000 — to be President Kennedy

6 Easy Ways to Cut Spending

If times are tough and you need to make some cuts to get ahead, don’t worry about it. Chances are you’re over spending on some non-essentials that you can cut without missing very much. Below are some ways to cut your spending and still have a life.

Make your own meals

Yeah, it’s nice to be able to step out to grab lunch or dinner at a restaurant whenever you feel like it, but it adds up fast. Not only is it not cheap, a lot of the food we eat at restaurants isn’t very healthy for us. You don’t have to give up going to restaurants, but you need to control how often you go and how much you spend. Pick a day of the week for lunch or dinner, set a budget and stick with it. A good compromise is to order take-out from a restaurant you like; you get the same great food but don’t need to give a tip!

Get rid of cable

The cable companies have come up with ingenious ways of packaging their products that cost you more for the few TV channels that you really want.

However, with the availability of high speed internet, you can watch a lot of television shows for free and exactly when you want. You can save a lot of money each month and not even feel like you’re going without.

Pay as you go

Cell phones can really eat up a lot of money for power-users. Many people get carried away with text messaging or phoning when they really don’t need to. If you use your phone a lot for work, see if your employer will provide a phone for you. Pay as you go is a great way to limit your phone calls and encourage you to use a land line whenever possible.  You can’t overspend this way and it will only take a few instances of running out of air time to teach you to curb your gabby ways.

Go to the library

Remember the library? It’s a great source of free resources.

If books aren’t your thing you can also borrow music and DVDs from the library. You may not be able to find the latest hits, but the price is right and you may find some previous releases that you missed or some old favorites. Many branches also have free internet if you’re forced to go without.

Ditch the credit card

Many people spend more than they have because of their credit cards. Breaking out of the habit of ‘buy now pay later’ may take some time, but is necessary for some people to stop the spontaneous purchases. You don’t need to cut up your credit cards – just leave them at home as much as possible. Another trick for the die-hard shoppers is to freeze your credit card in a block of ice; this will force your spending urge to ‘cool off’ while your credit card thaws out!

Carpool or bike to work

Many of us can’t live without our car, but if times get tough there are ways of getting by. If you’re not too far away you can consider biking to work. The cost of a decent bike can be recovered in less than a month compared to car payments, gas and insurance fees. Not only are you saving money, you’re getting in shape at the same time. Alternate options include carpooling or taking the bus which provides similar cost savings while keeping you out of the elements.

6 Easy Ways to Cut Spending

If times are tough and you need to make some cuts to get ahead, don’t worry about it. Chances are you’re over spending on some non-essentials that you can cut without missing very much. Below are some ways to cut your spending and still have a life.

Make your own meals

Yeah, it’s nice to be able to step out to grab lunch or dinner at a restaurant whenever you feel like it, but it adds up fast. Not only is it not cheap, a lot of the food we eat at restaurants isn’t very healthy for us. You don’t have to give up going to restaurants, but you need to control how often you go and how much you spend. Pick a day of the week for lunch or dinner, set a budget and stick with it. A good compromise is to order take-out from a restaurant you like; you get the same great food but don’t need to give a tip!

Get rid of cable

The cable companies have come up with ingenious ways of packaging their products that cost you more for the few TV channels that you really want.

However, with the availability of high speed internet, you can watch a lot of television shows for free and exactly when you want. You can save a lot of money each month and not even feel like you’re going without.

Pay as you go

Cell phones can really eat up a lot of money for power-users. Many people get carried away with text messaging or phoning when they really don’t need to. If you use your phone a lot for work, see if your employer will provide a phone for you. Pay as you go is a great way to limit your phone calls and encourage you to use a land line whenever possible.  You can’t overspend this way and it will only take a few instances of running out of air time to teach you to curb your gabby ways.

Go to the library

Remember the library? It’s a great source of free resources. If books aren’t your thing you can also borrow music and DVDs from the library. You may not be able to find the latest hits, but the price is right and you may find some previous releases that you missed or some old favorites. Many branches also have free internet if you’re forced to go without.

Ditch the credit card

Many people spend more than they have because of their credit cards. Breaking out of the habit of ‘buy now pay later’ may take some time, but is necessary for some people to stop the spontaneous purchases. You don’t need to cut up your credit cards – just leave them at home as much as possible. Another trick for the die-hard shoppers is to freeze your credit card in a block of ice; this will force your spending urge to ‘cool off’ while your credit card thaws out!

Carpool or bike to work

Many of us can’t live without our car, but if times get tough there are ways of getting by. If you’re not too far away you can consider biking to work. The cost of a decent bike can be recovered in less than a month compared to car payments, gas and insurance fees. Not only are you saving money, you’re getting in shape at the same time. Alternate options include carpooling or taking the bus which provides similar cost savings while keeping you out of the elements.

Related Gop Spending Cuts Articles

Grave Consequences For Defence Cuts

A letter written on Monday 27th September by Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox to David Cameron has been leaked to the Daily Telegraph.

In the letter Dr Fox warned Cameron that “dangerous” and “draconian” cuts to Britains military budget while the country was at war could lead to “grave consequences” for the Armed Forces. Dr Fox also comments in the letter that Cameron risks “destroying much of the reputation and capital” they have built up on defence and noted that if cuts go ahead then the “range of operations that we can do today we will simply not be able to do in the future.”

The letter was written in advance of a National Security Council meeting between the parties to discuss the Strategic Defence and Security Review.

Previously, Fox had agreed in public that the MoD would have to feel the burden of cuts.

Defence cuts are being made as a result of the Treasury asking the MoD to save 10% on its annual 37billion budget. This amount of saving could mean that tens of thousands of Armed Forces personnel may lose their jobs.

Dr Fox goes on to comment in his letter; “Frankly, this process is looking less and less defensible as a proper SDSR and more like a “super CSR” (comprehensive spending review). “If it continues on its current trajectory it is likely to have grave political consequences for us.”

All branches of the Armed Forces face cuts to their capabilities including the Royal Navys plan for new aircraft carriers and the Royal Air Force who may lose many fighters and any new Nimrod surveillance aircraft, all of which are needed.

The Review has been under debate for months, having been criticised by MPs. Bob Ainsworth, former Defence Secretary has spoken out commenting; “It is clear the government is in chaos…..This is an incredible letter which reflects many of our concerns about their approach to this review.”

Only last month it was reported that the MoD were planning to axe 5,000 wounded war heroes who have been injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. Many of the injured have sustained serious personal injury having served in recent and fierce operations overseas.

In June 2005 the long term future of Headley Court Defence Medical Centre that cares and rehabilitates injured personnel from all service disciplines, was thrown into doubt as a result of defence cuts. The Centre currently treats around 6,500 patients per year for a range of serious injuries including limb loss, brain and spinal injury or a combination of both as well as muscle, bone and joint injuries. For most of those injured in combat, Headley Court is their final and most vital stage of the recovery process.

After months of the MoD trying to find ways of cutting their budget, Dr Fox confirms that the cuts are “financially and intellectually virtually impossible”.

Operations across all branches of the Armed Forces could be affected dramatically and the fear is that the cuts would seriously damage morale. Fox comments that this occurs during a “period of major challenge (and, in all probability, significant casualties) in Afghanistan.”

To make such drastic cuts across the Armed Forces when the war in Afghanistan would have a significant effect on all personnel serving oversees. The cuts also come at a time when national security is of increasing importance

Congress is trying to stop previously agreed on triggers that would result in large cuts to spending on the bloated US defense budget. The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur explains. www.politico.com Subscribe to The Young Turks: bit.ly Find out how to watch The Young Turks on Current by clicking here: www.current.com The Largest Online New Show in the World. Google+: www.gplus.to Facebook: www.facebook.com Twitter: twitter.com
Video Rating: 4 / 5

GM Cutting Spending

All Americans have now felt some pinch of rising prices in our economy. Not only are individual households experiencing financial difficulties, but also businesses, from family owned to major corporations. General Motors is no exception. Since 1908, GM has thrived in the automobile industry and from 1930 to 2007 maintained the reputation of being the biggest automobile manufacturer. However, General Motors has some changes in its future.

With rising gas prices and credit tightening, automobile sales in the United States have slowly dwindled. Production of vehicles, as well as research and development for new innovations, are being reduced, especially at General Motors. With an 11.4% reduction in vehicles sold globally in the third quarter of 2008, General Motors has postponed their innovations for the 2009 and 2010 production years, in order to cut their corporate costs.

This reduction is expected to save GM .5 billion while it focuses on creating smaller, more compact vehicles.

Their long awaited innovations, such as the Volt and Chevrolet Camaro, will still be introduced in 2009 and 2010. However, future product research and development, especially regarding full-size pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, will be postponed temporarily.

General Motors will now aim its success at its ability to develop more compact vehicles, such as the Cruze. GM plans on increasing the sales here in the United States focusing on what will appeal to Americans. In order to ensure the future financial stability of its company, its goal now is to focus its attention on what consumers want, which right now tends to be fuel efficient or alternative fueled vehicles.

With the global automobile market sales dwindling, General Motors is sure that postponing future research and development on new automobile prospects will provide the right direction for the company, as well as emerge over Toyota to reestablish themselves as the biggest automobile manufacturer.

Find More Cut Spending Articles

Free Goverment Web Sites

Most government Web sites are about as exciting as a Senate appropriations hearing. Besides lacking charisma, sites are difficult to navigate and a bear to search. But the possibilities of the Internet make having an effective Web site too valuable to neglect.

 

The “musts” of good government Web site design

 

There are five major “musts” to any government Website. The site must be:

 

User-friendly

Direct

Section 508 Compliant

Searchable

Branded

 

Web sites must be designed with the user experience in mind. Every aspect of the site should make sense and follow expected patterns. For people to use it, it must be easier than picking up the phone. Options must be clearly defined and information as accessible as possible.

 

Running in Circles

 

Don’t send your users on a wild goose chase.

The path to find information must be direct. In standard Web site design, users should be able to access the key function of a site within three clicks. And watch for those nasty circles. Site maps and testing are vital to keeping a site free from loops.

 

Every User, Everytime

 

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act demands that Web sites must be accessible to all users, regardless of impairment. Make this a chance to ensure your site resonates with everyone equally. By including such things as verbal tags and graphics identification, designers can make a site available to all the constituents.

 

Seek and You Will Find

 

Searches on government pages seem to search every government page. Instead, searches should be limited to the site from which it is made.

And the search terms must be natural language. Include common words by thinking about what the audience would. Getting into the users head is key to any design endeavor.

 

Image is Everything

 

Branding gives a fresh look and feel to an otherwise boring site. In the same way commercial businesses use it, branding breeds loyalty. By presenting a consistent image, backed by a consistent experience, constituents know that a logo is more than just a picture. It’s a promise of excellence.

 

What now?

 

It’s easy to create a Web site, but making it great takes creativity and forethought. Imagine the user and what they expect and build from there. Dot gov and can be dot amazing.

Become a ‘fan’ on Facebook! Click here www.facebook.com Our country is on the verge of financial Armageddon! Please forward this to everyone you know. This is the second video produced by Blaise Ingoglia. Visit www.governmentgonewild.org for more

More Goverment Spending Articles

White House to Federal Agencies – Cut Contractor Spending

The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is directing federal agencies to develop a plan to reduce contract spending by 3.5 percent in FY2010. This will be followed by a further 3.5 reduction in FY2011. This downward trend culminates with a mandate that each agency develop a plan to save 7 percent on contract spending by the end of 2011. The Administration has a net savings target of billion a year. And where is that thrift coming from? That would be you contractors.

The guidance issued by OMB Director Peter Orszag outlines strategies for agencies to improve acquisition practices, make better use of information on contractors’ past performance, and find an appropriate mix of federal employees and contractors. Orszag also enumerated a number of other ways cost savings could be realized: ending contracts that are no longer essential; recruiting the acquisition workforce necessary to negotiate more favorably priced contracts and manage costs more effectively; developing strategic acquisition approaches to leverage buying power; increasing the use of technology to control contracts; and re-engineering ineffective business processes and practices.

In addition, OMB instructed agencies to reduce by at least 10 percent the share of dollars obligated through new contracts in fiscal 2010 that are awarded noncompetitively; receive only one bid; or are cost-reimbursement, time and materials, or labor hour-type agreements.

The more astute reader will quickly ascertain that only one contract type has been excluded, fixed price. So this guidance continues the drum march to fixed price competitively awarded contracts.

One of the three OMB memos, titled “Managing the Multi-Sector Workforce” requires agencies to immediately conduct a pilot human capital analysis of at least one program or project where the agency as concerns about the extent of reliance on contractors.

It also provides guidance on Section 736 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009. Section 736 requires agencies to implement procedures to ensure that special consideration is given to using federal employees over contractors. This new guidance is troubling for contractors already buffered by in-sourcing woes, particularly since we have no clear definition of what is inherently governmental. Onsite contractors-stay tuned.