Obama's Budget is no Way to Win the Future! Reason Writers Around Town: Gillespie & de Rugy on AOL News
Nick Gillespie and Veronique de Rugy work through the rottenness of President Obama's 2012 budget—and the likely lame-o response from congressional Republicans.
Here's a snippet:
Far from winning the future, Obama has decided to punt on first down. Instead of dealing with federal spending that has ballooned by more than 60 percent in constant 2010 dollars over the past decade—spending pushed by Republicans and Democrats alike—the president has decided to stick with a status quo that is leading us to fiscal ruin.
In the broadest outlines, Obama proposes spending $3.7 trillion in 2012 (about the same as this year). Over the course of the coming decade, he claims that his spending plan would trim the deficit by about $1.1 trillion, with about two-thirds of theoretical savings coming from spending less than expected (such as a five-year freeze on non-security-related discretionary spending) and one-third from tax increases (on high-income earners).
Another way of putting this is that the president's plan for the next decade does nothing to balance spending and revenue; over 10 years, it adds about $8 trillion to the national debt. The key reality here is that outlays and revenues are further apart at the end of the series.
And then read de Rugy and Gillespie on how to balance the budget over the next decade without raising taxes or cutting essential government services: "The 19 Percent Solution."
Update: Note that the chart above is different.
