Balance the Budget?

[Dr.Traveler]

Budget Puzzle: Can you Balance the Budget

New York Times this week has an interactive Flash app that lets you try a hand at balancing the budget through spending cuts and tax hikes. I'm curious, for those Left and Right that like to gripe about the budget, can you do it?

I did it. You can link to your choices so everyone here can mock your poor decision making skills. Here's mine.

You'll see I covered 79% of the budget gap by cutting government, and 21% by raising taxes. I don't honestly think that it's possible to cover all 100% with spending cuts using the options given.

So, how did you all do?

EDIT: Correction, by using the harshest Spending Cuts, without touching the military I can cover the 2030 shortfall. Unless you want to implement tough military cuts, I don't see you can cover the 2015 shortfall with just cuts.

EDIT: Let's make it interesting. If you cover the gap and post the link to your solution for us all to see, I'll give you a positive rep (assuming I can). Thanks to all who've posted so far.

 

[Oddball]

Made it close to the target all with budget cuts.

There are zillions of other areas (i.e. corporate subsidies, the welfare state, the idiotic "war" on [some] drugs) that would've likely put the number over the top.

Also, the tax increases presume that those increases wouldn't change behavior to avoid them...Which never pans out.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It is a limited choice site...but I decided not to stop until I balanced it.
25% by tax hikes, 75% by spending cuts


Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[Big Black Dog]

Here at my house, when we talk about balancing our budget, the first thing the wife does is cut all the stuff I want to buy out of the budget. Her items are never cut...

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Here at my house, when we talk about balancing our budget, the first thing the wife does is cut all the stuff I want to buy out of the budget. Her items are never cut...

I suggest switching back the clothes you both wear.

 

[antagon]

i managed 17/83 with the choices provided, but would likely find and crop money from some other spots if i had the choice.

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[loosecannon]

Made it close to the target all with budget cuts.

There are zillions of other areas (i.e. corporate subsidies, the welfare state, the idiotic "war" on [some] drugs) that would've likely put the number over the top.

Also, the tax increases presume that those increases wouldn't change behavior to avoid them...Which never pans out.

So show us how you did it, rock star!

 

[loosecannon]

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

I solved the problem thru 2030 while only getting 2/3 of the way thru the page. Which convinces me this is bullshit. There is a 100 trillion liabilities shortfall and within 5 years interest on the debt alone is reported to be $1 trillion/year.

If it is this damned easy why do we have a 1.3 trillion deficit?

 

[Mad Scientist]

I think this was posted already. My point then is the same now. Just cut the budget and let THEM figger out the rest. That's THEIR job, we pay THEM to do that.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

I solved the problem thru 2030 while only getting 2/3 of the way thru the page. Which convinces me this is bullshit. There is a 100 trillion liabilities shortfall and within 5 years interest on the debt alone is reported to be $1 trillion/year.

If it is this damned easy why do we have a 1.3 trillion deficit?

Because half the stuff on the list is flat out impossible to get through Congress, no matter who's in charge. Also note, there's no options in here for increasing spending, which Congress actually does all the time, nor is there an option for cutting taxes.

So, the game being played here is that assuming no tax cuts, or spending hikes, what do you cut from the budget or what taxes do you increase to actually balance.

It's a fun game to play if for nothing else so you can see just how little some of the stuff people harp on (Farm Subsidies, Ear marks) actually matter, and just how expensive some things (Military Expenditures, Entitlements like Medicare and Social Security) have become.

I know that if you look at my first try at a solution, posted in the OP, there's a lot of stuff in there that would get me flat out assassinated by Left wing and Right Wing wackos, forget actually getting elected in the first place if I actually stated these goals on the election trail.

I will add, some of the options for cuts are limited, as are some of the taxation options. There's a lot of creative things that could close the gap if they could actually get traction.

Keep posting folks. I'm curious what your percentages look like. I know a lot of you think I'm Left leaning, but I'm curious how many folks can beat my 79/21 split.

 

[uscitizen]

Cut all corporate subsidies and tax breaks for specific industries.
Do not extend the Bush tax cuts.
Or one that would never happen, a pure flat tax with no deductions.
We could reduce the IRS budget by 3/4.
And bring in more revenue.

Close about 3/4 of offshore military bases about 200 billion gone with that one.

Make congress cut their operating budget by 25%

Pull out of Iraq and Afganistan.

Make the federal gas tax based on a percentage price of the price of the fuel being purchased instead of a flat tax per gallon.

also ban all paid lobbyists.

 

[uscitizen]

I think this was posted already. My point then is the same now. Just cut the budget and let THEM figger out the rest. That's THEIR job, we pay THEM to do that.

but corporations pay them much more than we do.

 

[shintao]

I was able to balance the budget with an open conscious.


Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[Oddball]

Keep posting folks. I'm curious what your percentages look like. I know a lot of you think I'm Left leaning, but I'm curious how many folks can beat my 79/21 split.

There are problems with some of the assumptions, not the least of which are earmarks and raising taxes.

First off, most earmarks are money that would be spent in block grants to the states in the first place. The earmarking process merely involves congressweasels directing some of that money to favored projects.

Secondly, as I already mentioned, the tax increases presume that people will continue engaging in the taxed activity in the same manner that they did prior to the new tax and/or increase....Which never ever happens.

But, for the sheer shits-n-grins of the exercise:


Eliminate earmarks
Eliminate farm subsidies
Cut pay of civilian federal workers by 5 percent (I'd go for a deeper cut, but that's the only option available)
Reduce the federal workforce by 10 percent (ditto)
Cut 250,000 government contractors
Other cuts to the federal government
Cut aid to states by 5 percent

Reduce nuclear arsenal and space spending
Reduce military to pre-Iraq War size and further reduce troops in Asia and Europe
Cancel or delay some weapons programs
Reduce the number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to 30,000 by 2013 (I'd withdraw altogether, but, again, that option isn't available)

Enact medical malpractice reform
Increase the Medicare eligibility age to 70
Cap Medicare growth starting in 2013

Raise the Social Security retirement age to 70
Tighten eligibility for disability

I wouldn't indulge in any of the proposed tax policies, as the problem is still overspending, not undertaxation.

Even though there's still a slight shortfall, I could easily find other programs and bureaucracies to axe.

 

[loosecannon]

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

I solved the problem thru 2030 while only getting 2/3 of the way thru the page. Which convinces me this is bullshit. There is a 100 trillion liabilities shortfall and within 5 years interest on the debt alone is reported to be $1 trillion/year.

If it is this damned easy why do we have a 1.3 trillion deficit?

Because half the stuff on the list is flat out impossible to get through Congress, no matter who's in charge. Also note, there's no options in here for increasing spending, which Congress actually does all the time, nor is there an option for cutting taxes.

So, the game being played here is that assuming no tax cuts, or spending hikes, what do you cut from the budget or what taxes do you increase to actually balance.

It's a fun game to play if for nothing else so you can see just how little some of the stuff people harp on (Farm Subsidies, Ear marks) actually matter, and just how expensive some things (Military Expenditures, Entitlements like Medicare and Social Security) have become.

I know that if you look at my first try at a solution, posted in the OP, there's a lot of stuff in there that would get me flat out assassinated by Left wing and Right Wing wackos, forget actually getting elected in the first place if I actually stated these goals on the election trail.

I will add, some of the options for cuts are limited, as are some of the taxation options. There's a lot of creative things that could close the gap if they could actually get traction.

Keep posting folks. I'm curious what your percentages look like. I know a lot of you think I'm Left leaning, but I'm curious how many folks can beat my 79/21 split.

The NYT tutorial is a crock. None of the spending cuts suggested were deep, and I managed to cut the deficit to zero within 2/3 of the page of options.

It's crap. 85% of the discretionary spending is within SS, medicare and the military. You have to take an axe to those to chop away 35% of the whole budget.

 

[JBeukema]

Budget Puzzle: You Fix the Budget - Interactive Feature - NYTimes.com

 

[JBeukema]

I find it disingenuous that it labels not-extending th Bush Tax Cuts, which are set to expire, 'raising taxes'. Not cutting taxes =/= raising taxes

 

[Avorysuds]

Yeah it's kinda of weird... Like half options and stuff.

Maybe I missed the "pull out of afghanistan and Iraw button... But it only takes an amount of troops out by 2013 at best.

This little game actually made it seem quite easy to fix the deficit and all that to be honest.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Yeah, well I managed to get a surplus going by 2015 and a $0 deficit by 2030. Here's how to do it:

Short-term: Cut Spending (40%)

- You manage to kill $191 billion (almost half) and $349 billion (a little more than a quarter) to the 2015 and 2030 budgets respectively just by doing away with all that silly military spending.

- You do a few sensible things: eliminate farm subsidies, moderately raise the retirement age for SS and Medicare, enact malpractice reform, and reduce benefits for rich people, you get $49 billion in 2015 and $208 billion in 2030

- Already got $240 billion (58.8%) and $557 billion (41.1%)! Doing pretty good only $178 billion and $798 billion to go just from spending cuts. Though in reality, that's really as far as it can go in the very short term, anything more than this could really start endangering any recovery from the Recession. Any of the cuts to state aid, or cuts to public employment and contractors, would pretty much wreck the already high unemployment level, anyone in the White House would be suicidal to go through with that. Cutting federal pay by 5% could be ok... would give you a bonus $14b and $17b tip respectively.

Long Term: Raise Taxes (60%)

- So finally, to really close the deficit over the long term, specifically AFTER the recovery gets a little more robust... if it does so at all. According to the calculator, the following would cut $402b/$787b for 2015/2030, but the first number would be overinflated since I don't think any of these things should come into effect at least until after or maybe during 2012 (nevertheless I'm assuming it would at least get the $178 billion needed to close the gap): Return estate tax to Clinton-era levels, Obama's proposal on capital gains tax, expiration of Bush tax cut for the $250,000+ peeps, let the payroll tax ceiling rise, institute the millionaire's tax, the Bowles-Simpson plan, the carbon tax, and the bank tax.

So we're left with a $408-642 bllion cut to the budget for 2015 and a $1,355 billion cut for 2030, and problem solved.

In either case it's not entirely necessary to get it to cover EVERYTHING. The point is to make the deficit less insane, but its important to keep in mind (especially when people are proposing something as silly as a 'balanced-budget' amendment) that governments, like people, should always be expected to be able to incur some debt. Sometimes countries are in deficit, sometimes they're in surplus, just like people and corporations, and the fact that some individuals and entities sometimes are borrowers and sometimes lenders is one of the foundations that allows the capitalist system to function. It may be silly and stupid, but that's the way it works in capitalism.

I would also like to point out that none of this is impossible or crazy. It can definitely be done. Its hard but it can be done. It's exactly what is going on in Europe, that's why people are going nuts there. I think it's a fair assessment to say that in Europe the governments are not quite as afraid of their people as in the US (or maybe their leaders have more balls? could be, but I lean towards the former). Even "leftist" governments like in Spain (they even have the word SOCIALIST in their title! Imagine that!) are instituting pretty stern cutbacks to everything and receiving strong opposition in return. But in America, where the phrase "Austerity Measures" (all too known in most other places) would probably draw you blank faces of confusion, of course it appears politically impossible to do almost anything about the debt, even with the loudmouthed tea-parties going 'round all over the place.

 

[antagon]

I find it disingenuous that it labels not-extending th Bush Tax Cuts, which are set to expire, 'raising taxes'. Not cutting taxes =/= raising taxes

i would say the same thing about a politician who said they wont raise taxes, but who let low-tax provisions expire.