Government has been growing like a cancer. When you have cancer you need radical surgery. Unfortunately, I am not sure Trump is cutting out the right parts. We need SS and Medicare reform, neither of which I want, but that does not mean it is not needed.
its just a first step in the right direction. until our budget is SMALLER than the previous year we are losing ground. keep cutting until the national debt stops growing. THAT would be a win, even if the total doesn't go ddown right away
1
The author is wrong. 3% growth is ABSOLUTELY possible and probably an underestimate, under Trump, with his freeing business from regulations and his proposed corporate tax cuts.
1
Ratner apparently doesn't understand either math or history. Trump's proposed budget is larger than the 2017 budget; therefore, it isn't a "cut"; and, the CBO's 3% outyear growth rate is .2% below the post war average growth rate of 3.2%. Labor shortages, if they actually exist, can be addressed by an economically oriented immigration policy and technology.
The only real limiters to the growth rate are government regulations that drive costs, lower the business formation rate, and slow down the supply chain and velocity of capital, and tax policies that distort capital away from it's best economic use and redistributes said capital toward social policies favored by progressives.
The only real limiters to the growth rate are government regulations that drive costs, lower the business formation rate, and slow down the supply chain and velocity of capital, and tax policies that distort capital away from it's best economic use and redistributes said capital toward social policies favored by progressives.
Chuck, your own understanding of economic history leaves much to be desired. You state that the average postwar rate of economic growth is 3.2%. I assume the war you refer to was WWII. That average is meaningless for us today, because it includes the thirty years of rapid growth immediately after the war. The rate of growth in recent decades has been closer to the 2% projected by most economists.
Immigration could certainly help improve labor supply, but in case you haven't noticed, Trump dislikes immigration. With respect to technology, your glib assurance that it will solve growth problems is a poor substitute for the actual development of the advanced machinery.
Your unsubstantiated attacks on regulations and tax policies merely parrot the tired Republican mantra that an unshackled free market would solve all problems. This supply side approach has been tried, weighed in the balances, and found wanting.
Immigration could certainly help improve labor supply, but in case you haven't noticed, Trump dislikes immigration. With respect to technology, your glib assurance that it will solve growth problems is a poor substitute for the actual development of the advanced machinery.
Your unsubstantiated attacks on regulations and tax policies merely parrot the tired Republican mantra that an unshackled free market would solve all problems. This supply side approach has been tried, weighed in the balances, and found wanting.
2
Yeah, minus 40%. As long as you realize those "cuts" mostly are to projected increases. Not to the current amount the agencies currently rake in.
Trump's proposal to eliminate Medicaid is well beyond unfair
But it hasn't mobilized the poor to protest.
The average Medicaid recipient's benefits total about $5,000 per person. Since Medicaid recipients pay nothing on their own, the $5,000 constitutes their total annual benefits. By contrast, those insured through their employer get about $10,000 in coverage and pay somewhere around $2,000 out of pocket.,
In short, Medicaid spending provides approximately 40% of the benefits of the self-insured. And Medicaid recipients get substantially less care and substantially lower quality care than the self-insured. Medicaid services vary from state to state. In Boston waits are 12 weeks to get an examination for possible skin cancer. In Philadelphia the wait for the same services is 7 weeks. Here in Arizona mental health care is so bad that the courts deemed them unconstitutional,
Studies show that Medicaid patients die younger than others, which calls into question the morality of 40% insuring the poor. Trump proposes not to insure them at all, which is preposterous. But those who proudly count the 75 million covered by Medicaid need to understand that they're 40% covered. .
Ask yourself how Trump can eliminate Medicaid without loud protests from the poor. The poor demonstrate for workers rights, against police violence, for immigrants' rights, and for services to veterans among other things. But their Medicaid care doesn't seem to be all that cherished by them.
But it hasn't mobilized the poor to protest.
The average Medicaid recipient's benefits total about $5,000 per person. Since Medicaid recipients pay nothing on their own, the $5,000 constitutes their total annual benefits. By contrast, those insured through their employer get about $10,000 in coverage and pay somewhere around $2,000 out of pocket.,
In short, Medicaid spending provides approximately 40% of the benefits of the self-insured. And Medicaid recipients get substantially less care and substantially lower quality care than the self-insured. Medicaid services vary from state to state. In Boston waits are 12 weeks to get an examination for possible skin cancer. In Philadelphia the wait for the same services is 7 weeks. Here in Arizona mental health care is so bad that the courts deemed them unconstitutional,
Studies show that Medicaid patients die younger than others, which calls into question the morality of 40% insuring the poor. Trump proposes not to insure them at all, which is preposterous. But those who proudly count the 75 million covered by Medicaid need to understand that they're 40% covered. .
Ask yourself how Trump can eliminate Medicaid without loud protests from the poor. The poor demonstrate for workers rights, against police violence, for immigrants' rights, and for services to veterans among other things. But their Medicaid care doesn't seem to be all that cherished by them.
Thomas a Becket:" It is here now, the supreme folly, this is its hour. "
2
Donald Trump and the Republican Party are rapidly attempting to turn this country into a third world nation where the relatively few -- The One Percent [who, I'd bet, are all Republicans] -- rule and the rest of us, especially the poor, serve and scrabble to make ends meet.
1
Harry,
I am curious about what you think. Over the last eight years we borrowed $10 trillion resulting in doubling the national debt to $19.8 trillion and a currently we have an additional $126 trillion dollar in unfunded liability for social security/medicare that will come due in the next 50 years. Additionally in the event that Trump is correct and the economy grows at a 3.5%-4.0% growth rate and interest rate jump up from essentially 0% to 3.75% how will the federal government make interest payments on the interest rate spike? This is called a death spiral!
So here's the question, which is more likely to be disastrous for the country, the reduction in growth of Medicare/Social Security spending or paying the interest on $19.8 trillion in debt PLUS the corresponding predatory taxes that future generation will have to pay to cover the $128 trillion dollar social security unfunded liability? If someone doesn't start taking this problem seriously there won't be any social security safety net! Remember when President Roosevelt enacted social security it was NOT meant to be a sole source of retirement income, it was only suppose to augment your savings!
I am curious about what you think. Over the last eight years we borrowed $10 trillion resulting in doubling the national debt to $19.8 trillion and a currently we have an additional $126 trillion dollar in unfunded liability for social security/medicare that will come due in the next 50 years. Additionally in the event that Trump is correct and the economy grows at a 3.5%-4.0% growth rate and interest rate jump up from essentially 0% to 3.75% how will the federal government make interest payments on the interest rate spike? This is called a death spiral!
So here's the question, which is more likely to be disastrous for the country, the reduction in growth of Medicare/Social Security spending or paying the interest on $19.8 trillion in debt PLUS the corresponding predatory taxes that future generation will have to pay to cover the $128 trillion dollar social security unfunded liability? If someone doesn't start taking this problem seriously there won't be any social security safety net! Remember when President Roosevelt enacted social security it was NOT meant to be a sole source of retirement income, it was only suppose to augment your savings!
Ahhh, the "businessman" comes to the rescue. Silly us for expecting more.
Imagine you have a well-established 200-hundred-year-old business in which you decide to drastically cut your strategic planning staff, R&D investment, technology investment, process improvement staff, customer service, healthcare, training, and non-executive pay, while incongruously hiring more armed security guards to swarm the roof and perimeter. No matter how much you demand your financial staff cook the books and your PR staff spin Orwellian Newspeak, it won't be long before that long-cherished, carefully tended business begins its death spiral.
But maybe that was Trump's Gordon Gekko plan all along? I suppose those armed security guards would then come in handy to protect the executives from the starving peasants, ensure the remaining assets are sold to the highest bidder, and allow the kleptocrat family to safely escape with their bounty to a gold-lined New Zealand bunker.
Imagine you have a well-established 200-hundred-year-old business in which you decide to drastically cut your strategic planning staff, R&D investment, technology investment, process improvement staff, customer service, healthcare, training, and non-executive pay, while incongruously hiring more armed security guards to swarm the roof and perimeter. No matter how much you demand your financial staff cook the books and your PR staff spin Orwellian Newspeak, it won't be long before that long-cherished, carefully tended business begins its death spiral.
But maybe that was Trump's Gordon Gekko plan all along? I suppose those armed security guards would then come in handy to protect the executives from the starving peasants, ensure the remaining assets are sold to the highest bidder, and allow the kleptocrat family to safely escape with their bounty to a gold-lined New Zealand bunker.
6
You have not described President's Trump America. You have just described socialist Venezuela.
Stephen Bannon may have been sidelined, but this is "deconstruction of the administrative state" that he described in February. This a huge stride on the way to the "night watchman state" libertarians have imagined since at least the 1970s.
As Steven Rattner suggests, and others like Paul Krugman have said expressly, the Trump budget amounts to an attack on all of government that does not involve security (national security, policing, surveillance, guard labor) and adjudication of contractual disputes. This is the state that Dick Cheney obliquely advocated in the 1980s and 90s. But enough of the things that people will more or less agree to gut (like Medicaid) and very soon other public institutions begin to collapse -- education, transportation, health care.
However much some Americans associate good government with good defense and security, the government with which we regularly engage is the government of roads and bridges, weather forecasting, health care, retirement, schooling. It is the government of daily living in a society that is far, far more complex than that the Trumps and Cheneys and Kochs and Mercers imagine existed 150 or 200 years ago.
And what they imagine didn't even exist then.)
As Steven Rattner suggests, and others like Paul Krugman have said expressly, the Trump budget amounts to an attack on all of government that does not involve security (national security, policing, surveillance, guard labor) and adjudication of contractual disputes. This is the state that Dick Cheney obliquely advocated in the 1980s and 90s. But enough of the things that people will more or less agree to gut (like Medicaid) and very soon other public institutions begin to collapse -- education, transportation, health care.
However much some Americans associate good government with good defense and security, the government with which we regularly engage is the government of roads and bridges, weather forecasting, health care, retirement, schooling. It is the government of daily living in a society that is far, far more complex than that the Trumps and Cheneys and Kochs and Mercers imagine existed 150 or 200 years ago.
And what they imagine didn't even exist then.)
6
So Sad, they don't teach you guys history. The Boston Tea Party was a tax revolt against the East India Company which owned more than half the World. The tax on tea was very much the auto and financial bailout. The tax was on everybody else's tea as the East India Company had liquidity problems and two large London warehouses filled with tea.
The East India Company mercenaries patrolled and maintained order in the colonies. King George was a weak and compromised monarch and much like Goldman Sachs the East India determined legislation and taxation.
That is why Jefferson so opposed large corporations and that is also the basis of the second amendment which understood the necessity of trained government armed forces to protect American sovereignty.
La plus ca change.
The East India Company mercenaries patrolled and maintained order in the colonies. King George was a weak and compromised monarch and much like Goldman Sachs the East India determined legislation and taxation.
That is why Jefferson so opposed large corporations and that is also the basis of the second amendment which understood the necessity of trained government armed forces to protect American sovereignty.
La plus ca change.
3
I like the reduction of government to the minimum needed as envisioned 200 years ago. Go President Trump!!
Trump's budget is not what should worry you. What Paul Ryan wants should worry you.
8
Amen. Trump in so many ways is so perfect a stalking horse for the world Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnel want to push us into. The Reagan Revolution continues: tax cuts for the wealthy, headlong retreat from public education,
Subsidies for corporations, hatred of state regulation that protects from corporate abuse. Dear God I feel as if I am living through a very protracted
Nightmare.
I was in my early twenties and Reagan was governor. He was in the habit of taking very long lunches and I would pass him on my way to work in the local juvenile hall. I used to wonder what it was like to work no harder than he worked.
I used to wonder too how anyone could be so detached from the struggle others went through. That was 40 years ago. Donald, Paul and Mitch have gotten me clear how high you can rise when you are above the battle and without empathy. I no longer think much about Ronald Reagan.
Subsidies for corporations, hatred of state regulation that protects from corporate abuse. Dear God I feel as if I am living through a very protracted
Nightmare.
I was in my early twenties and Reagan was governor. He was in the habit of taking very long lunches and I would pass him on my way to work in the local juvenile hall. I used to wonder what it was like to work no harder than he worked.
I used to wonder too how anyone could be so detached from the struggle others went through. That was 40 years ago. Donald, Paul and Mitch have gotten me clear how high you can rise when you are above the battle and without empathy. I no longer think much about Ronald Reagan.
3
Only if your job is as a government bureaucrat.
FWIW, I saw a reference elsewhere that 60% of Medicaid expenditure is on the Elderly (Keeping Grandma in the Nursing Home) and Disabled.
Can't find ANYONE who admits to knowing the real distribution of Medicaid spending.
The economic effect of Tax cuts and Austerity are on view in Kansas, Oklahoma and to a lesser extent here in Arkansas (I live in the Shadow of Walmart corporate HQ, lot's of resources in my immediate vicinity). Republicans and their base voters seem to be willfully ignoring the gruesome impacts these policies are having on Rural communities in those states.
Can't find ANYONE who admits to knowing the real distribution of Medicaid spending.
The economic effect of Tax cuts and Austerity are on view in Kansas, Oklahoma and to a lesser extent here in Arkansas (I live in the Shadow of Walmart corporate HQ, lot's of resources in my immediate vicinity). Republicans and their base voters seem to be willfully ignoring the gruesome impacts these policies are having on Rural communities in those states.
8
Without sufficient healthcare, the white male population, including veterans, particularly veterans will continue to be depleted by overdose and suicide, murder and poor health care.
It is amazing that those same white males buy this. The desperation is truly sad.
It is amazing that those same white males buy this. The desperation is truly sad.
5
Everyone outside of the 1% is expendable according to Trump calculations. Power corrupts and Trump wants to give birth to that "gleaming white country on the hill." At least they won't have to see those degraded souls in the gutter.
6
Fake math.
2
The GOP is not conservative it is neoliberal. Sadly neoliberal is such a bad word in that it is neither new nor liberal it is a philosophy that puts together the entire American political spectrum. It is a belief in perpetual growth and that the private sector does growth better. There is no alternative coming from the Democrats as even Paul Krugman who calls himself a liberal is a neoliberal.
America does not need ideological solutions it needs to again make ethics and philosophy core subjects. Computers do STEM very well but we need lawyers economists and scientists to have strong ethical foundations. Neoliberalism is about growth and efficiencies but we need truth and humanity.
Donald Trump is the poster child for the failure to teach our children truth , justice and the American way.
America does not need ideological solutions it needs to again make ethics and philosophy core subjects. Computers do STEM very well but we need lawyers economists and scientists to have strong ethical foundations. Neoliberalism is about growth and efficiencies but we need truth and humanity.
Donald Trump is the poster child for the failure to teach our children truth , justice and the American way.
6
The entire Republican concept of governance is based on fraud.
Liberals need to make this point often and loudly. Tax cuts have NEVER paid for themselves since the 1980's, they have been a major factor in the concentration of wealth (and it's destabilizing influence in our politics) since that date.
Even worse, the ideologues the Right Wing Conspiracy have placed in State and National Government have no interest in providing the governmental services many Americans want and expect. Their masters don't want to pay the bill (taxes) to provide those services, and the Propaganda Organs have provided an infotainment diversion from the true costs of this mania for cutting those expenditures. But then, I believe in Keynesian economics, which the Propaganda Organs dismiss out of hand.
Liberals need to make this point often and loudly. Tax cuts have NEVER paid for themselves since the 1980's, they have been a major factor in the concentration of wealth (and it's destabilizing influence in our politics) since that date.
Even worse, the ideologues the Right Wing Conspiracy have placed in State and National Government have no interest in providing the governmental services many Americans want and expect. Their masters don't want to pay the bill (taxes) to provide those services, and the Propaganda Organs have provided an infotainment diversion from the true costs of this mania for cutting those expenditures. But then, I believe in Keynesian economics, which the Propaganda Organs dismiss out of hand.
12
People have no right to expect so many government services. That is socialism.
Given that since Jimmy Carter's inauguration, the S&P 500 has grown twice as fast when we had a democratic president as it did when we had a Republican president, and the deficit has grown twice as fast when we had a Republican president as it did when we had a Democratic president, why is a budget like Trump's such a surpise. Despite Republican claims of fiscal responsibility, their actual track record is pretty abysmal.
16
This is Groundhog Day. Republicans always gut the budget and slash the tax code to favor the rich. This necessarily blows big holes in the deficit which successor Democratic Administrations must fill.
So Republicans are seen as tax cutters and Democrats as tax raisers. Silly game.
So Republicans are seen as tax cutters and Democrats as tax raisers. Silly game.
10
I'm not sure "radical surgery" is an accurate metaphor. Perhaps "traumatic amputation" more accurately captures Trump's and the GOP's intent. Or maybe "organ harvesting" since the unabashed goal of the budget is to ensure the wealth, health and happiness of the richest 1% of this country at the expense of the middle and lower classes of Americans.
11
Can we talk about the over-bloated, utterly obscene "defense" spending in the budget? Why is that no one (politicians, NYT reporters/analysts, public) is willing to bring it up?
7
Defense is one of the few legitimate functions of government and SHOULD be fully funded.
Sadly, we have become accustomed to the lies told by Donald Trump on a wide variety of topics, and they range from wild exaggerations to outright fabrications.
Still, to see such dishonesty formally set forth in an official document like a budget – embraced by the vast majority of Republicans on Capitol Hill – is astounding.
Through this budget proposed by the Trump White House and touted by Speaker Paul Ryan, the Republicans are saying two things:
One, we hate poor people. Two, we think the vast majority of Americans are stupid and won’t notice or remember what we are doing.
Steve Rattner has a knack for bringing clarity to fiscal policy, and hopefully he can help some moderate Republican politicians (if any still exist) see the cruelty, deception and foolishness in the Trump/Ryan budget and its lop-sided tax cuts.
Still, to see such dishonesty formally set forth in an official document like a budget – embraced by the vast majority of Republicans on Capitol Hill – is astounding.
Through this budget proposed by the Trump White House and touted by Speaker Paul Ryan, the Republicans are saying two things:
One, we hate poor people. Two, we think the vast majority of Americans are stupid and won’t notice or remember what we are doing.
Steve Rattner has a knack for bringing clarity to fiscal policy, and hopefully he can help some moderate Republican politicians (if any still exist) see the cruelty, deception and foolishness in the Trump/Ryan budget and its lop-sided tax cuts.
7
Trump's budget cuts are a series of amputations that will adversely affect the lives of tens of millions of Americans, not simply radical surgery.
The president doesn't put much value on human life, other than his own and that of his family.
The president doesn't put much value on human life, other than his own and that of his family.
10
What can we do about the lies????!!!!!! They keep getting bigger and bigger. There is indeed no honor among these thieves- the anti- Robin Hoods who claim Jesus and lie about that too. So sad and mad and the next election can't come soon enough and if voters don't wake up, good luck to us all.
5
The word that comes to mind for them is "hateful."
6
"Radical surgery" is the wrong analogy because radical surgery has the ultimate goal of cure, where these cuts are designed to kill. This is "torture to death" of the American dream, and indeed of the more general dream of democratic humanism, for which the foremost championing has now moved from the U.S. to Europe.
17
Eventually people will realize (even his hard core supporters) that Trump has one goal - to take care of Trump. "Tell them what they want to hear. Feed into their fantasies" (Art of the Deal).
Chaos and Diversionary tactics. No substance, all fluff. Lies, lies and more lies.
And the sad thing here is most of his base that put this lunatic in office will suffer the most.
Chaos and Diversionary tactics. No substance, all fluff. Lies, lies and more lies.
And the sad thing here is most of his base that put this lunatic in office will suffer the most.
4
The more one analyzes current political trends the more the case for reallocation of wealth sounds necessary no inevitable
1
President Bannon has already told us what he wants.
An end to America. In his mind this will lead to a paradise, and therefore it doesn't matter how many people suffer on the way. Bannon's only problem is Trump. And "imperfect vessel" I believe he once called him.
An end to America. In his mind this will lead to a paradise, and therefore it doesn't matter how many people suffer on the way. Bannon's only problem is Trump. And "imperfect vessel" I believe he once called him.
9
I find myself firmly in the Rattner camp and against the Trump camp on this budget. But let's be sure we are asking the right question about Medicaid. That right question is not "by how much should Medicaid funding be increased or decreased?"
The right question is "by what means should the healthcare needs of those unable to afford health insurance be covered?" To presume that answering that question is solely a matter of setting Medicaid budgets unnecessarily constrains the solution set.
Mostly, this is a matter for Republicans to address. They can talk all they want about fixing federal budgets. But that's not the job. It is far more important that they articulate a rationale, intelligible view of how healthcare is going to be paid for, for those who cannot afford it. So far, they offered only gibberish about tax credits and markets. Not a single credible analysis has supported their gibberish.
The right question is "by what means should the healthcare needs of those unable to afford health insurance be covered?" To presume that answering that question is solely a matter of setting Medicaid budgets unnecessarily constrains the solution set.
Mostly, this is a matter for Republicans to address. They can talk all they want about fixing federal budgets. But that's not the job. It is far more important that they articulate a rationale, intelligible view of how healthcare is going to be paid for, for those who cannot afford it. So far, they offered only gibberish about tax credits and markets. Not a single credible analysis has supported their gibberish.
5
Many senior citizens rely on Medicaid for long term care when their personal savings are completely exhausted. Don't worry about the "death tax" folks because there won't be anything left anyway.
Savage cuts to the poor and elderly just when we are about to be hit with the bulk of Baby Boomer retirements and health issues!
Savage cuts to the poor and elderly just when we are about to be hit with the bulk of Baby Boomer retirements and health issues!
10
Medicaid puts a lien on a beneficiary's house, so using Medicaid takes away inheritance.
1
A reduction in the growth of future spending is NOT a spending cut.
I wholeheartedly agree with Bruce Rozenblit that we must see something like this budget proposal become the law of the land., as it has become painfully obvious that the only thing that stands a chance of causing a course change from the disastrous one we are currently on is, well, a disaster. This budget is precisely that, and if remotely reflected in the budget ultimately approved by congress will rain misery and anguish down on many of those who voted this crowd into power. The only question is whether the nation can survive it, and at this point nobody knows the answer to that. But we are destined to find out.
5
The rich elites can't stand the thought that there's a little bit of wealth still spread among the lower classes. And they're coming for it.
8
Mulvaney is the cruelest of the cruel, in a party that is redefining cruelty for Americans. Few remember during his confirmation hearing that when Elizabeth Warren asked him about Social Security he said (I paraphrase here): "I have told my children that they will not have Social Security". That's because his goal is to eliminate it. Beyond Rattne's excellent analysis is the probability that in a few years or a decade, he will be right - there will be no Social Security. He also lied and said that Social Security will be "empty" in a few years. Neither Sanders or Warren called him on that. The Social Security Administration is saying that it will remain 100% solvent well into the next decade, and getting better as more are employed, then the worst it will get is paying 75%. You won't hear that on Fox News.
21
We are 20 trillion dollars in debt already. How would YOU propose we solve this problem?
Trump's "budget" -- which he no doubt had almost nothing to do with drafting -- is political theater, playing to the ignorant base that elected Trump for his "toughness." It's never going to become law and everyone knows it. It amazes me that intelligent media like the NYT are even discussing it.
3
Donald Trump has no shame...
This is the harsh reality we have here in our beautiful country.
This is the harsh reality we have here in our beautiful country.
12
Err, what? Medicaid cutting is not limited to the GOP. See here,
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/us/politics/medicare-and-medicaid-face...
Furthermore, the OMB estimates over 10% of Medicaid spending improper/fraudulent. Furthermore, further to the left that is, the rebel state of California folks alone gobbles 15% of Medicaid spending. The same guys whose eccentric governor makes no bones of wanting to be a world climate change leader, the same state that never fails to remind us of what an economic super-engine they are (snicker, snicker).
In short, Mr. Rattner would do the country real good if he opined in the LA Times with a much-needed wakeup call. Over here, he comes across as just another disgruntled Obama-ite, eagerly twisting anything Trump to shades of dark red. While he's got plenty company, he should know beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. Where Mr. Rattner sees bloody red, Trump supporters like this one, see deliciously aged red wine served courtesy the greatest American president we've known since FDR.
Yeah, MAGA! That's what this budget has written all over it. It'll pass.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/us/politics/medicare-and-medicaid-face...
Furthermore, the OMB estimates over 10% of Medicaid spending improper/fraudulent. Furthermore, further to the left that is, the rebel state of California folks alone gobbles 15% of Medicaid spending. The same guys whose eccentric governor makes no bones of wanting to be a world climate change leader, the same state that never fails to remind us of what an economic super-engine they are (snicker, snicker).
In short, Mr. Rattner would do the country real good if he opined in the LA Times with a much-needed wakeup call. Over here, he comes across as just another disgruntled Obama-ite, eagerly twisting anything Trump to shades of dark red. While he's got plenty company, he should know beauty lies in the eye of the beholder. Where Mr. Rattner sees bloody red, Trump supporters like this one, see deliciously aged red wine served courtesy the greatest American president we've known since FDR.
Yeah, MAGA! That's what this budget has written all over it. It'll pass.
3
Greatest American President since FDR? Greater then the God Regan? You have been sipping too much red wine.
1
I'd like to personally thank all of the people that voted for Donald Trump... please note sarcasm.
8
"A new foundation for American greatness"? How presumptive. How vain. How utterly ludicrous.
13
Steve, it's not that they "[don't] like the poor". As Mulvaney and his cohort would probably say (in private), their view of the cumulative implications and inferences of 250 years of constitutional precedent tell them it's not the FUNCTION of American government to 'give to the poor'. They would say they "don't have a problem with the poor as such", they just question the basis upon which collective action can, or should, be justified to eliminate 'being poor' aka 'poverty'.
It's an important distinction. And I don't mention it to humanize this bunch of ethically-challenged radicals. Instead, as Progressives, we should probe and challenge their philosophical inferences as they themselves see them.
It would be a wonderful thing for the American people to see an engaged debate between sitting representatives about how these radicals view government, as opposed to trying to shame them for their mathematical cold-heartedness. They wear that like a badge of honor. Therefore, we need a different approach.
Ivan Krastev wrote, elsewhere in the NYT today, "In an atmosphere of radical political polarization, leaders are trusted not for who they are, but for who their enemies are".
We should rejuvenate the arguments used in the 1930's to convince a skeptical America to embark on the New Deal, and use them to poke holes in the ethical, moral, and constitutional rationalizations of today's oligarchic defenders.
We could then make Americans see who their real enemy is.
It's an important distinction. And I don't mention it to humanize this bunch of ethically-challenged radicals. Instead, as Progressives, we should probe and challenge their philosophical inferences as they themselves see them.
It would be a wonderful thing for the American people to see an engaged debate between sitting representatives about how these radicals view government, as opposed to trying to shame them for their mathematical cold-heartedness. They wear that like a badge of honor. Therefore, we need a different approach.
Ivan Krastev wrote, elsewhere in the NYT today, "In an atmosphere of radical political polarization, leaders are trusted not for who they are, but for who their enemies are".
We should rejuvenate the arguments used in the 1930's to convince a skeptical America to embark on the New Deal, and use them to poke holes in the ethical, moral, and constitutional rationalizations of today's oligarchic defenders.
We could then make Americans see who their real enemy is.
3
I live in Arkansas 3rd. My "Representative" is not interested in debate, he was elected to "Enact the Conservative Agenda." And discussion of his existing (Two) (Generous) government pensions is NOT open for discussion.
4
Look, you wouldn't run your household endlessly in debt. And the government can't actually do this either without being a beholden debtor nation.
This budget is a true outrage I'd suggest Americans of all political stripes take seriously. I recommend the nonpartisan Fixthedebt.org to see the impact on rising US debt on all Americans, and CRFB.org, and leader Maya MacGineas.
Here's a sensible perspective: tax reform needs to be bipartisan. Also 1) cuts should be compassionate, and the wealthy have choices the other 90 percent don't. 2) no budget math will work without some moderate entitlement reform, like inching up retirement age or benefits. I'm a gen Xer, and the money won't last for us. 3) these hacks to discretionary future investments are painful, and we will pay as a society for less research/more disease, less education/more susceptibility to con men, etc. The Trump budget vastly overstates economic growth and understates the pain.
Even voters who ponder the benefit of government taking less from their income should see this radical budget as a terrible opening bid that will increase taxes for most, skyrocket debt for dumb reasons like a wall, and hurt most Americans. Tell your representatives this is unacceptable and not representing your interests.
This budget is a true outrage I'd suggest Americans of all political stripes take seriously. I recommend the nonpartisan Fixthedebt.org to see the impact on rising US debt on all Americans, and CRFB.org, and leader Maya MacGineas.
Here's a sensible perspective: tax reform needs to be bipartisan. Also 1) cuts should be compassionate, and the wealthy have choices the other 90 percent don't. 2) no budget math will work without some moderate entitlement reform, like inching up retirement age or benefits. I'm a gen Xer, and the money won't last for us. 3) these hacks to discretionary future investments are painful, and we will pay as a society for less research/more disease, less education/more susceptibility to con men, etc. The Trump budget vastly overstates economic growth and understates the pain.
Even voters who ponder the benefit of government taking less from their income should see this radical budget as a terrible opening bid that will increase taxes for most, skyrocket debt for dumb reasons like a wall, and hurt most Americans. Tell your representatives this is unacceptable and not representing your interests.
11
"Entitlement reform" - pardon me, but I have diligently paid into these so called entitlements for almost 4 decades. No to tax cuts for the wealthy while they cut or reduce my hard earned so called entitlements. Stop doing and voting against your own best interest gen Xer.
3
The whole "Fix the Debt" campaign was an astroturf organization funded by a billionaire hedge fundie who doesn't want to pay taxes, or believe in the Federal government, He doesn't "need" Social Security, why should anyone?
The real issue is Republican Irresponsibility, especially delivering tax cuts to their donor base, putting two very expensive wars on the National Credit Card, and kicking the can of VA costs down the road.
The real issue is Republican Irresponsibility, especially delivering tax cuts to their donor base, putting two very expensive wars on the National Credit Card, and kicking the can of VA costs down the road.
3
Donald,
While I enjoy comic relief as much as the next person, it's time that you stopped being a punch line and became serious.
A serious President would not propose plans that were essentially a plan for genocide against his electorate and his planet.
Think.
I know that it's hard for you, but think.
Best regards and best hopes for this planet.
THINK
While I enjoy comic relief as much as the next person, it's time that you stopped being a punch line and became serious.
A serious President would not propose plans that were essentially a plan for genocide against his electorate and his planet.
Think.
I know that it's hard for you, but think.
Best regards and best hopes for this planet.
THINK
15
Trump's Budget as "Radical Surgery"?
More like a maniacal gutting of the quality of life of MOST Americans!
More like a maniacal gutting of the quality of life of MOST Americans!
16
Not one cent more (and maybe many cents less).for the Pentagon. We spend more than the next five countries on the military. And what is our return on that investment? The only good news is that the Trump budget is dead on arrival. The bad news is that it appears that no one is at home at the White House. And even Trump supporters understand that truth.
17
Whatever in the world made Mr. Rattner think that the Republicans any longer care about fiscal responsibility? Once upon a time, decades ago, they prided themselves on being the party of fiscal responsibility. Not any more. Now they're the Party of Fiscal Recklessness in Service to Reverse Robin Hood Economics. Call it "trickle down" if you like but it's really turning a fire hose of wealth to the tope 1%. Their Commandments: 1) Cut taxes, no matter what. 2) Tax cuts go overwhelmingly to the rich, 3) Beggar the poor and middle class. What have they ever done for the rich? 4) Patriotism? Surely you jest!
24
...and yet polling suggests that Trump voters for the most part are standing by him, at least so far. To generalize, those voters are the ones in the cross-hairs for proposals such as those in the President's budget.
I'm not suggesting that his supporters change en masse their party affiliation to Democrat. I am, however, suggesting a reality check.
If I am accused of left-wing arrogance, I plead guilty and I'm sorry if that's all someone reads into my comment. The insult from my conceit is inconsequential compared to the wounds our President has in store!
I'm not suggesting that his supporters change en masse their party affiliation to Democrat. I am, however, suggesting a reality check.
If I am accused of left-wing arrogance, I plead guilty and I'm sorry if that's all someone reads into my comment. The insult from my conceit is inconsequential compared to the wounds our President has in store!
17
The proposed budget would bring "...equally large reductions in a vast array of domestic discretionary programs, ranging from education to environment to research and development and so many more." It sounds like this narcissistic, morally bankrupt, corrupt, immature, intemperate, and astonishingly stupid President wants to return us all to the Middle Ages.
25
Deprivation, Poverty, and Starvation are The Foundations for American Greatness according to Mick 'The Knife' Mulvaney.
17
I just recalculated my potential tax bill should the Trump cuts hold. I have the same kind of investments as the Donald, i.e. retail rental space with depreciation deductions held by a pass through LLC. A quick computation showed me I would be paying less than half what I do now. To further put that in perspective I would be paying around one seventh of what a typical wage earner now pays on the same income. Does that sound fair? Do you think it will cover the costs of schools and adequate health care? Or roads and environmental programs? Why, like the Donald, I would be laughing all the way to the bank. Until the revolution what would be sure to follow.
55
Like it or not, the US government has been spending much more than it produces for decades before Trump took office, creating a huge debt which hurts the US economy and is unsustainable. Like Greece, you can't address this issue without "radical surgery. "
6
But that's because of tax cuts on the 1%.
Republicans always leave that part out.
Republicans always leave that part out.
3
I keep on shaking my head every time I hear commentary like this. The majority of the GOP seems to want to turn the clock back to the 1880s before the Progressive era, let alone the New Deal and the Great Society. With the current leadership in both Congress and the White House we are seeing overt signs of a new Social Darwinism on the rise though many call it Ayn Randism as that is a more recent reference.
As an example look to the comments made by HUD Secretary Ben Carson on poverty. The same thoughts and ideas were used in the late 1800s to justify what was happening in America (or for a contemporary look at this viewpoint remember Scrooge before his visitations in "A Christmas Carol"). The same goes for the repeal of the estate tax, which came in during the Progressive Era as a way to prevent the rise of an overt aristocracy.
We have now come full circle to the Gilded Age of the 1890s. The question is where is the next Teddy Roosevelt to help save America from itself?
As an example look to the comments made by HUD Secretary Ben Carson on poverty. The same thoughts and ideas were used in the late 1800s to justify what was happening in America (or for a contemporary look at this viewpoint remember Scrooge before his visitations in "A Christmas Carol"). The same goes for the repeal of the estate tax, which came in during the Progressive Era as a way to prevent the rise of an overt aristocracy.
We have now come full circle to the Gilded Age of the 1890s. The question is where is the next Teddy Roosevelt to help save America from itself?
36
Trump's budget does what Republicans have promised to do for years.
The Rich are rewarded.
The Poor are punished.
Instead of relying upon the government to help the Poor, we will rely upon the generosity of the Rich to give to the Poor. We know from the fine example of President Trump's personal generosity to the least among us just how meaningful that will be.
The Rich are rewarded.
The Poor are punished.
Instead of relying upon the government to help the Poor, we will rely upon the generosity of the Rich to give to the Poor. We know from the fine example of President Trump's personal generosity to the least among us just how meaningful that will be.
46
Lots of important issues in this article. My focus is on healthcare - I don't like even the modest cut in Medicare. here is why: Alzheimers. The number of American Citizens afflicted by this disease is going to increase substantially over the next 3 decades. The cost to Medicare alone will be staggering, and will absolutely overwhelm the Medicare budget unless a miracle cure arrives. We need to think about this now. The answer: We MUST stop paying 50% or more than the rest of the entire world for all pharmaceuticals. It is wasting an absolute minimum of 200 billion dollars a year total to all parties in the US. Secondly - Yes Medicaid needs to be supported. But the expansion of eligibility to families of four making $94,000 or less was a mistake. Why? Two reasons - 12 million uninsured illegal immigrants who still need healthcare and a lack of ambulatory clinic access for Medicaid patients regardless of coverage. Hospitals and ERs are far too expensive for health maintenance, and not effective either. It isn't what they do. We must correct the drug spending problem soon so we have the resources to use elsewhere in hopes of avoiding a scarcity mentality that may not be necessary.
13
Trump’s [real] Doctrine is “every man for himself and I’m president”. Placing money in his pocket through enormous tax cuts for the wealthy by drastically cutting the budget and slashing health care coverage is how it will be done openly, along with various Trump businesses also collecting it on the side.
Follow the money and with Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller getting Trump’s tax records, conflict of interest and obstruction of justice will be the highlight along with long term Russian connections (US banks wouldn't loan Trump money as a bad risk in mid-2000's, but guess who would).
Follow the money and with Justice Department Special Counsel Robert Mueller getting Trump’s tax records, conflict of interest and obstruction of justice will be the highlight along with long term Russian connections (US banks wouldn't loan Trump money as a bad risk in mid-2000's, but guess who would).
14
What bothers me most about cutting budgets to reduce taxes is that I won't see any of those tax cuts – they are all going to millionaires and billionaires.
15
Is there anyone who can explain the motives underlying the Trump budget? Like - who will pay for the elderly folks in nursing homes or long term care who are on Medicaid? Who will support the families who are below the poverty line in income and will lose food stamps that help them feed their children? Who will help the families who have disabled children that need constant care so that the mom or dad has to be home with them or they will be in a care system on Medicaid? These and many other similar situations are just unfathomable in terms of what the budget will do to these families and individuals. There is nothing in the news about what Trumps advocates say will support these folks who need assistance.
30
obviously, only the wealthy deserve health care that they've "earned" by virtue of their wealth. the rest can just die on the streets.
13
Until recently I do not remember any serious concern that the concerns regarding the issue of the Federal budget deficit might be addressed by simply using false information and/or employing unrealistic economic projections. That sadly is not true now. It is now widely conceded that Greece essentially hid the extent of its debt problems prior to the events that led to Greece requiring a bailout. America can print its currency and almost all federal debt is denominated in dollars. Thus, there is no danger of default. However, there is a risk that the that the inconsistency between Trump administration desires for addition spending on security and tax cuts could be resolved, at least temporarily, with the use of deception.
The bond markets could be expected to react adversely to any use of false numbers. I do not think that any claim by the Trump administration that reports in the media of discrepancies between the real deficit and debt figures what the Trump administration are asserting are fake news, would impress the financial markets, even if many in the public believed the Trump administration. The use of economic assumptions that defy logic could also put the Federal Reserve into vigilante mode.
Today the top 3% of households pay about 50% of Federal income taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 50%. In 1969 the top 3% of households paid 75% of Federal income taxes and the rest of the 97% paid only the other 25%. .."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4075223
The bond markets could be expected to react adversely to any use of false numbers. I do not think that any claim by the Trump administration that reports in the media of discrepancies between the real deficit and debt figures what the Trump administration are asserting are fake news, would impress the financial markets, even if many in the public believed the Trump administration. The use of economic assumptions that defy logic could also put the Federal Reserve into vigilante mode.
Today the top 3% of households pay about 50% of Federal income taxes and the rest of the 97% pay the other 50%. In 1969 the top 3% of households paid 75% of Federal income taxes and the rest of the 97% paid only the other 25%. .."
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4075223
4
for #% to pay 75% of the taxes sounds unbelievably unfair to me. Thank God is 50% now but it should be an even lower percentage. All should pay.
As you know there are alternative facts and alternative math.
17
Deficits never matter under a Republican president. If a Democrat tried this Republicans would be up in arms but instead we hear crickets.
These cuts are cruel. The baby boomers are aging and many of them rely on Medicaid to cover the cost of nursing home care. Are we going to start evicting our elders, is that who we've become.
These cuts are cruel. The baby boomers are aging and many of them rely on Medicaid to cover the cost of nursing home care. Are we going to start evicting our elders, is that who we've become.
50
Whar will the next presidential and mid-term congress promise us to fix another massive economic collapse? Maybe increases to FEMA to bury the dead?
10
Indeed, President Trump "really, really [does] not like the poor," but this distinguishes him in no way from the Party of which he is titular head. Neither the President nor the GOP much like minorities, immigrants, Muslims, Europeans, environmentalists, community organizers, people with pre-existing conditions or bicyclists.
As for women, they're for groping. And as for foreign thuggish dictators, they get invited to the White House on your dime and mine.
As for women, they're for groping. And as for foreign thuggish dictators, they get invited to the White House on your dime and mine.
59
Essentially the Republicans are capitalists. They only truly respect other people who have the financial wherewithal to create products, start businesses, and make large purchases that lead to more business and more product creation.
Everyone who is not involved in these sorts of capitalistic endeavors are less valuable and therefore less respected. Basically, if you work for a living, you matter less.
But they really only* despise* people who aren't able to earn a living, for they contribute little or nothing.
Really, this isn't that hard to figure out. If you work for a living, you should be striving to be a capitalist yourself, and if you're failing to earn a living, you need to get busy and earn one. No one has a right to any minimal basic level of anything. You only have rights to the extent that you have contributed to capitalism.
So, in other words, there are tens of millions of teachers, fireman, policeman, government employees etc. who count for less, and below them? Well you don't even want to know what they count for.
And if you don't like this, well, this is America, and you should've been an entrepreneur!
And I don't think most people who strongly support Republicans policies would really disagree with what I've written. So, why don't their leaders explain this philosophy of theirs to the voters?
Come on, tell them the truth!
Everyone who is not involved in these sorts of capitalistic endeavors are less valuable and therefore less respected. Basically, if you work for a living, you matter less.
But they really only* despise* people who aren't able to earn a living, for they contribute little or nothing.
Really, this isn't that hard to figure out. If you work for a living, you should be striving to be a capitalist yourself, and if you're failing to earn a living, you need to get busy and earn one. No one has a right to any minimal basic level of anything. You only have rights to the extent that you have contributed to capitalism.
So, in other words, there are tens of millions of teachers, fireman, policeman, government employees etc. who count for less, and below them? Well you don't even want to know what they count for.
And if you don't like this, well, this is America, and you should've been an entrepreneur!
And I don't think most people who strongly support Republicans policies would really disagree with what I've written. So, why don't their leaders explain this philosophy of theirs to the voters?
Come on, tell them the truth!
9
The Medicaid cuts do not imply that that Trump doesn't like the poor. Indeed "the poors" love Trump and on that basis he loves them back. He just understands that expensive health care is luxury that America simply cannot afford to offer them while at the same time cutting taxes for the more deserving.
10
Republicans like Mulvaney can't tell the difference between Ayn Rand and Steve Bannon...
Why have a budget --- just steal everything from the American taxpayer--- get wealthier and watch people die on cable tv.
Note photo: Nice folder.
Why have a budget --- just steal everything from the American taxpayer--- get wealthier and watch people die on cable tv.
Note photo: Nice folder.
14
Mr. Trump and the GOP leadership are merely implementing to policies championed by the Koch brothers. The only government they like is one that they can exploit for their own gain. They have bought and paid for the GOP. Trump and his ilk are merely "useful idiots".
22
Virtually every federal program that was created came about by people pleading with their representatives, "Please help us. We can't solve this problem on our own." So, each federal program has a constituency calling on its continued funding. Not every program is vital to the nation nor even to the cohorts it is supposed to help, but, in sum, they all add up but they are the smaller portion of the federal budget. Cutting 101 small items is less effective than cutting 1 or 2 really big ones.
The Trump budget writers went through page after page of funding requests with one goal in mind, cutting. Those who benefit from federal spending are not merely the poor, the sick, the disabled and those seeking education. Corporations, mom and pop grocery stores, farmers (industrial scale and otherwise) and millions of others benefit from the flow of federal dollars.
Here's a catch in the Trump budget not often mentioned: a disproportionate amount of the federal budget goes to states that vote Republican. If this budget, or something like it, were put into law, dozens of Trump voting states would go into recession. Billions of dollars in farm subsidies are one example. These go, in the main, to states that voted for Trump. Oops. Big problem.
Much of the so called welfare payments, etc., go to the working poor, allowing corporations like Walmart to pay substandard wages while their employees go on food stamps, etc. This is corporate welfare by another name.
The Trump budget writers went through page after page of funding requests with one goal in mind, cutting. Those who benefit from federal spending are not merely the poor, the sick, the disabled and those seeking education. Corporations, mom and pop grocery stores, farmers (industrial scale and otherwise) and millions of others benefit from the flow of federal dollars.
Here's a catch in the Trump budget not often mentioned: a disproportionate amount of the federal budget goes to states that vote Republican. If this budget, or something like it, were put into law, dozens of Trump voting states would go into recession. Billions of dollars in farm subsidies are one example. These go, in the main, to states that voted for Trump. Oops. Big problem.
Much of the so called welfare payments, etc., go to the working poor, allowing corporations like Walmart to pay substandard wages while their employees go on food stamps, etc. This is corporate welfare by another name.
41
A budget proposal is a statement of values. Enough said.
19
Radical surgery? This is an execution. First there will be a sudden increase in personal debt as pulling down the ACA results in job losses and an increase in un-covered medical care. Second, the extreme cuts in government spending, causes layoffs and even greater personal debt, resulting in more loan defaults. The final blow comes when republicans unleash the banking system by repealing Dodd-Frank. The banks become unable to absorb the increase in loan defaults, because of over leveraging. Losses in the stock market make the banks even more unstable. The banks cannot remain stable without massive government intervention. Confidence in US leadership in the world is crushed, because of the actions of Donald Trump and the continued instability of the US financial system. The US dollar can no longer survive as the reserve currency of the world. Interest rates soar and infrastructure re-building has to be put off yet again. America then takes it's place among third world countries. Does anyone else see this possibility?
39
Trump sure would make a fine suicide bomber as he has been trying to take us all out with him in his late stage of life.
You forget that beyond the 50 percent reduction in Medicaid funding in ten years, there will be many more people in the population needing the help.
You forget that beyond the 50 percent reduction in Medicaid funding in ten years, there will be many more people in the population needing the help.
11
Great editorial. But you lose people ending your first paragraph with a fancy hard-to-read phrase like "numerical integrity." To many people who need this message means, "Elites talking to elites." If you mean "honest arithmetic," say that!
5
are you saying anyone who paid attention in high school and learned some vocabulary is an 'elite' ?
sigh, the further dumbing down of america.
sigh, the further dumbing down of america.
5
Both parties are to blame for not raising taxes. Gasoline taxes have not been raised since the 90"s. Infrastructure is falling apart. Education has been gutted by tax reductions in the name of "growth"
1. Index gasoline taxes to inflation.
2. Lower corporation taxes but raise individual taxes.
3. Increase payroll tax limit to $1,000,000.
4. Eliminate second and 3rd home deductions
That's just a few of my favorites. How many times must we put up with the old Reagan trickle down therory.
Get out and support candidates who recognize the truth in 2018.
1. Index gasoline taxes to inflation.
2. Lower corporation taxes but raise individual taxes.
3. Increase payroll tax limit to $1,000,000.
4. Eliminate second and 3rd home deductions
That's just a few of my favorites. How many times must we put up with the old Reagan trickle down therory.
Get out and support candidates who recognize the truth in 2018.
13
Yes, all of this is completely reasonable and should be done immediately!
The reason it isn't is because of too much money in politics and too much distrust of government by the same people who would benefits from these changes.
The reason it isn't is because of too much money in politics and too much distrust of government by the same people who would benefits from these changes.
Now isn't that special.
A man born with a silver spoon in his mouth, enabled and rescued time-and-again by his millionaire father, produces a budget that rails against entitlements - but would none-the-less bankrupt the nation as surely as Trump bankrupted his casinos.
If you voted for this fool, you deserve this budget - and the fiscal wreck that will surely follow. The problem is that a majority of Americans voted against him, and this kind of penny-wise, pound-foolish economic insanity - and we deserve better than to have to accompany you into the outhouse.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me every time, I must be a movement conservative...
A man born with a silver spoon in his mouth, enabled and rescued time-and-again by his millionaire father, produces a budget that rails against entitlements - but would none-the-less bankrupt the nation as surely as Trump bankrupted his casinos.
If you voted for this fool, you deserve this budget - and the fiscal wreck that will surely follow. The problem is that a majority of Americans voted against him, and this kind of penny-wise, pound-foolish economic insanity - and we deserve better than to have to accompany you into the outhouse.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me every time, I must be a movement conservative...
106
The Congress and Trump are doing everything in the wrong order! The first order of business should be to demand transparency in medical billing and tackle uncompetitive practices in Big Pharma, as Trump promised to do. The next step should be to provide seed money to set up non-profit co-ops and mutual insurance companies. Once these cost cutting measures are in place, the next step should be to tackle unfair trade practices in which the U.S. imports goods made by poorly paid workers without benefits. With the right plan of trade fairness, then more employers will offer insurance. Trump has to oppose importing immigrants who will drive down wages and raise social benefit costs. Only after these issues are tackled is it time to deal with Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act. The twin solutions of lower health care prices, plus more jobs with benefits could make a health plan like the Republican one work. However, this plan does not solve any of the problems in marketplace--it only transfers costs to the poor.
3
Note cut in Social Security.
Big cut in Medicare, which will mean that more things will not be covered.
Big cut in Medicare, which will mean that more things will not be covered.
11
This is another attempt at normalization of the Trump administration. Mr. Rattner is applying sound reasoning backed by rudimentary mathematics to disavow the Trump budget. Reasoning and math ain't got nothin to do with it.
We have a simpleton in the White House. OK, that was my attempt at political correctness. We have an incompetent ignoramus in the White House. That's more like it. Trump has no understanding of what he is doing. His handlers have told him this budget is a win. It's a win for those that want to dismember government and further line the pockets of the rich. Obviously that sounds good to Trump.
I am so dejected, depressed and forlorn over this non-stop Trump debacle, that deep down inside I hope that they pass the darn thing. My desires are driven out of spite for those that continue to support this idiot of a president. These people continue to reject all information that would shake their belief Trump the Messiah. They are the true Americans, the true believers in the most holy of holy presidents, not us liberals. The press is just out to get him because Trump knows the real truth about liberals.
When reason, logic, facts, and that thing we call reality get thrown out of the window, how can policy be created? How can we even have a discussion about policy?
I for one am through worrying about those that want to shoot themselves in the foot. Go ahead, blow your feet off. Pass the Trump budget.
We have a simpleton in the White House. OK, that was my attempt at political correctness. We have an incompetent ignoramus in the White House. That's more like it. Trump has no understanding of what he is doing. His handlers have told him this budget is a win. It's a win for those that want to dismember government and further line the pockets of the rich. Obviously that sounds good to Trump.
I am so dejected, depressed and forlorn over this non-stop Trump debacle, that deep down inside I hope that they pass the darn thing. My desires are driven out of spite for those that continue to support this idiot of a president. These people continue to reject all information that would shake their belief Trump the Messiah. They are the true Americans, the true believers in the most holy of holy presidents, not us liberals. The press is just out to get him because Trump knows the real truth about liberals.
When reason, logic, facts, and that thing we call reality get thrown out of the window, how can policy be created? How can we even have a discussion about policy?
I for one am through worrying about those that want to shoot themselves in the foot. Go ahead, blow your feet off. Pass the Trump budget.
80
"Trump must really hate the poor."
Yes. Maybe in his ignorance he thinks poverty is a contagious disease.
I honestly think Trump didn't even know what Medicaid was when he promised not to touch Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid at rallies.
I knew that Medicaid was taking two hits, one from its shrinkage (elimination) in the various replacement health plans Congress came up with and then the budget.
So even if they force some Medicaid patients to seek work (I'm sure that will be great for the disabled elderly) that's still a whole lot of people not covered. Will the GOP cheer and pat themselves on the back when the weekly death numbers and causes gets published by CDC? Will they list "poverty" as the cause?
Oh, I forgot! Funding will be cut for that too, by half. Just the amount of dollars to produce the biweekly MMRW reports.
There is never a shortage of money when it comes to cutting taxes on the wealthy.
No, the only shortages are those affecting programs that help the poor.
Yes. Maybe in his ignorance he thinks poverty is a contagious disease.
I honestly think Trump didn't even know what Medicaid was when he promised not to touch Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid at rallies.
I knew that Medicaid was taking two hits, one from its shrinkage (elimination) in the various replacement health plans Congress came up with and then the budget.
So even if they force some Medicaid patients to seek work (I'm sure that will be great for the disabled elderly) that's still a whole lot of people not covered. Will the GOP cheer and pat themselves on the back when the weekly death numbers and causes gets published by CDC? Will they list "poverty" as the cause?
Oh, I forgot! Funding will be cut for that too, by half. Just the amount of dollars to produce the biweekly MMRW reports.
There is never a shortage of money when it comes to cutting taxes on the wealthy.
No, the only shortages are those affecting programs that help the poor.
66
Trump hates the poor, you're right.
But not just the poor.
He hates everyone else who isn't at least a millionaire.
And not only does Trump hate us, but so does Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and every other Republican in Congress.
Thought for today: Know Your Enemies.
But not just the poor.
He hates everyone else who isn't at least a millionaire.
And not only does Trump hate us, but so does Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and every other Republican in Congress.
Thought for today: Know Your Enemies.
16
Trump believes that when he bankrupts America, he personally gets the tax write-off for the next 20 years.
Can someone explain to him he doesn't?
Does Trump understand he also can't keep the $1B in gifts the Saudis gave him - they belong to the United States, not him?
Can someone explain to him he doesn't?
Does Trump understand he also can't keep the $1B in gifts the Saudis gave him - they belong to the United States, not him?
24
When Republicans during the primaries found that they could not stop his nomination, Key Republicans such as Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell decided that they would use the Donald as a front man for their policies. They stopped attacking him and put their rich operatives close enough so that they could influence his policies. In a sense it does not matter what Trump promises or says. it is the Republican Party and their rich patrons that dominate him and control his limited intellect.
This budget with its draconian and nonsensical cuts that shows Republican thinking most clearly as it reflects their antipeople stance, the desire to drown the government in a bath tub and its lack of any consideration for the welfare of the nation. What good is a military that does not have the eyes and ears of the State Department or defending a country that has dirty air impossible to breathe? What good a country where so many die of opiod addiction or children with no support for their growth and education? And still there will be a deficit as huge tax cuts are enacted for the rich.
We may attack Trump for this terrifying budget, he is responsible, but it is his Republican masters who in their cowardly way let Trump take the fall as they stand behind the scenes applauding at their ability to gut our economy and welfare.
This budget with its draconian and nonsensical cuts that shows Republican thinking most clearly as it reflects their antipeople stance, the desire to drown the government in a bath tub and its lack of any consideration for the welfare of the nation. What good is a military that does not have the eyes and ears of the State Department or defending a country that has dirty air impossible to breathe? What good a country where so many die of opiod addiction or children with no support for their growth and education? And still there will be a deficit as huge tax cuts are enacted for the rich.
We may attack Trump for this terrifying budget, he is responsible, but it is his Republican masters who in their cowardly way let Trump take the fall as they stand behind the scenes applauding at their ability to gut our economy and welfare.
57
The closing Trump advertisement in the election railed against a supposed cabal of international elite financial figures who were claimed to be causing America's decline. It pictured financier George Soros, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, and GS CEO Lloyd Blankfein as the prime villains. Trump's inaugural address also reiterated the populist theme that the day of revenge against financial elites has arrived. Despite this, the one certain thing that can be predicted is that the Republican-controlled congress will enact and President Trump will sign is the elimination of the estate tax. This literally could be called taking from the millionaires to give to the billionaires. Estates under $5.49 million are now totally exempt from the estate tax. Billionaires are not as able as mere millionaires to employ various strategies to avoid estate taxes. Repealing the estate tax will give $billions to a fraction of the top 1%, which will ultimately have to be made up by the rest of the taxpayers.
Since 1966, there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and were 1.77% in 2016. During that same period, payroll tax rates as a percent of GDP have increased dramatically from 3.27% in 1966 to 5.95% in 2016..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4047608
Since 1966, there has been a tremendous shift in the tax burdens away from the rich onto the middle class. Corporate income tax receipts, whose incidence falls entirely on the owners of corporations, were 4% of GDP then and were 1.77% in 2016. During that same period, payroll tax rates as a percent of GDP have increased dramatically from 3.27% in 1966 to 5.95% in 2016..."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/4047608
11
Under Democratic control, no cuts would ever be made anywhere. This budget, like all before it, is a trial balloon, and what will come out of Congress will certainly be different. Given that a 1-year trial balloon is so unpredictable, gnashing teeth over a 10-year extrapolation is ludicrous. And doing so assumes Republicans retain control of Congress for the next 10 years.
2
Republicans always argue that cuts to increases are not cuts at all. But, the population continues to grow and, so far as I can tell, no one has proposed a comprehensive solution to poverty, so it is not unreasonable to project that needs in ten years will be larger than now. Everything grows larger or dies. If the problems are greater and the reductions accelerate, it is reasonable to conclude that the results would be drastic.
6
Good government does not come up with a trial balloon budget, good government has an honest and realistic budget. Good government is concerned with the welfare of the nation.
As citizens we have a right, a duty, to demand good, competent government, we pay them enough.
Bad government is a sign of a nation in real trouble.
Social statistics show the USA at the bottom compared with other advanced nations. Only negatives like the rates of incarceration, death penalty, solitary confinement, infant and maternal mortality, poverty, health care and education does the nation come out at the high end of the statistics. Not to forget, the nation does have the biggest military budget, it really is NUMBER ONE IN MILITARY SPENDING.
As citizens we have a right, a duty, to demand good, competent government, we pay them enough.
Bad government is a sign of a nation in real trouble.
Social statistics show the USA at the bottom compared with other advanced nations. Only negatives like the rates of incarceration, death penalty, solitary confinement, infant and maternal mortality, poverty, health care and education does the nation come out at the high end of the statistics. Not to forget, the nation does have the biggest military budget, it really is NUMBER ONE IN MILITARY SPENDING.
9
Guess you haven't heard of gerrymandered districts!
And I disagree, Democrats DID make some cuts in recent years, most famously to cooperate with Republican presidents.
But with both houses of Congress under Republican control, we can't expect the final product to be much better, can we? Short of preventing a default on the debt, when was the last time the Republicans were willing to compromise on spending?
And I disagree, Democrats DID make some cuts in recent years, most famously to cooperate with Republican presidents.
But with both houses of Congress under Republican control, we can't expect the final product to be much better, can we? Short of preventing a default on the debt, when was the last time the Republicans were willing to compromise on spending?
6
Steve, who is very entrenched in the Deep State and the Democratic party, offers us another NYT hit piece on Trump's budget and the economy. No where is the analysis on how entitlement spending is taking over all spending and, in about fifteen years, will reach 100%. What then? We have to get this economy growing or all bets are off. I agree with one commenter who said we have a very inefficient healthcare system, but single payer will add a layer of bureaucracy that will kill it. CA and NY are looking at a state based single payer system and now realize it doesn't work without massive tax increases. Surprise!
Steve, these are not massive cuts, but feeble attempts to cut the rate of growth. Let's have doctors and hospitals post their prices and have citizens pay them directly. Citizens can then buy whatever health insurance they want across state lines. Insurance middlemen are the problem. No, we don't need more military spending, but rather reallocation of existing dollars. Fire 30% of the Pentagon staff and nothing bad will happen. Voter surveys indicate they want a smaller budget for the State Department. The Federal Department of Education serves no purpose.
With that said, I really don't pay attention to Steve. He paid over $10 million to make fraud charges go away a few years ago when his firm was charged with illegal "bribes" to raise funds for a new venture. Just another Wall Street guy for the establishment, writing for an extremely biased website.
Steve, these are not massive cuts, but feeble attempts to cut the rate of growth. Let's have doctors and hospitals post their prices and have citizens pay them directly. Citizens can then buy whatever health insurance they want across state lines. Insurance middlemen are the problem. No, we don't need more military spending, but rather reallocation of existing dollars. Fire 30% of the Pentagon staff and nothing bad will happen. Voter surveys indicate they want a smaller budget for the State Department. The Federal Department of Education serves no purpose.
With that said, I really don't pay attention to Steve. He paid over $10 million to make fraud charges go away a few years ago when his firm was charged with illegal "bribes" to raise funds for a new venture. Just another Wall Street guy for the establishment, writing for an extremely biased website.
5
All other industrialized countries have some form of universal government run health care, mostly single payor. They get at least as good care as measured by all 16 of the bottom line public health statistics, and they do it at 40% of the cost per person. If our system were as efficient, we would save over $1.5 TRILLION each year.
www.pnhp.org & www.oecd.org, especially
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/oecd-health-statistics-2014-frequ...
Some data:
Here are the per capita figures for health care costs in 2013 in PPP dollars (which take cost of living into consideration) from the OECD:
OECD average - 3463
US - 8713
UK - 3235
France - 4124
Australia (similar obesity) - 3966
Germany - 4919
Denmark - 4553
The Netherlands - 5131
Canada - 4361
Israel - 2128
Switzerland (Highly regulated private insurance) - 6325
Singapore (2014) - 4037 (WHO)
Let's compare some bottom line statistics between the US and the UK which has real socialized medicine.
Life expectancy at birth:
UK - 81.1
US - 78.8
Infant Mortality (Deaths per 1,000):
UK - 3.8
US - 6.0
Maternal Mortality (WHO):
UK - 9
US - 14
The WHO using a formula developed by The Harvard School of Public Health ranks our system as 38th in the world. (France & Italy are 1 & 2). This formula doesn't include costs. Bloomberg ranked countries' systems on efficiency which does include costs. We came out as 50th out of 55.
www.pnhp.org & www.oecd.org, especially
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/oecd-health-statistics-2014-frequ...
Some data:
Here are the per capita figures for health care costs in 2013 in PPP dollars (which take cost of living into consideration) from the OECD:
OECD average - 3463
US - 8713
UK - 3235
France - 4124
Australia (similar obesity) - 3966
Germany - 4919
Denmark - 4553
The Netherlands - 5131
Canada - 4361
Israel - 2128
Switzerland (Highly regulated private insurance) - 6325
Singapore (2014) - 4037 (WHO)
Let's compare some bottom line statistics between the US and the UK which has real socialized medicine.
Life expectancy at birth:
UK - 81.1
US - 78.8
Infant Mortality (Deaths per 1,000):
UK - 3.8
US - 6.0
Maternal Mortality (WHO):
UK - 9
US - 14
The WHO using a formula developed by The Harvard School of Public Health ranks our system as 38th in the world. (France & Italy are 1 & 2). This formula doesn't include costs. Bloomberg ranked countries' systems on efficiency which does include costs. We came out as 50th out of 55.
42
Not sure what planet his core base of primary voters live on, but this budget Trump sent over would kill most of them so I hope they are not actually applauding it. I only wish they understood it's the Senate that's going to be saving their bacon: lean fare though it may seem, the final budget sure God will be better than what their dear leader Trump was going to dump on them like a couple trillion truckloads of "deconstruction" rubble. I await a "real" budget with interest. Good luck to the GOP coming up with something that doesn't finish fracturing their own party.
9
The scariest part is that most Trump supporters won't understand and will excuse Trump, even if it affects them personally. Read Strangers In Their Own Land by Arlie Hochschild and also Hillbilly Elegy by J D Vance.
14
Mean horrible man.
GOP = aggressive cancer.
GOP = aggressive cancer.
12
The budget from Hell.
Our despicable President and his despicable Republican Party have declared war on every American making less than seven figures.
Our despicable President and his despicable Republican Party have declared war on every American making less than seven figures.
12
There are many sound reasons to deplore Trump's budget, but the lack of fiscal responsibility isn't one of them. As I have posted many times, look at what fiscal responsibility has done to the economy every time we tried it for a while:
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years, and paid down the debt more than 10% in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" - source unknown
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." - George Santayana
The federal government has balanced the budget, eliminated deficits for more than three years, and paid down the debt more than 10% in just six periods since 1776, bringing in enough revenue to cover all of its spending during 1817-21, 1823-36, 1852-57, 1867-73, 1880-93, and 1920-30. The debt was paid down 29%. 100%, 59%, 27%, 57%, and 38% respectively. A depression began in 1819, 1837, 1857, 1873, 1893 and 1929.
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" - source unknown
"Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it." - George Santayana
7
An explanation for this:
1. We need money to conduct commerce.
2, As the economy grows we need more money.
3. Money can come to the private sector from 2 places--the federal government or from a favorable trade balance.
4. Money comes from the federal government in 2 ways--spending (fiscal) or from the FED to the banks (monetary).
5, The FED has sent a lot of money to the banks with little effect. The money has sat in the vaults of the banks or been lent to the Rich who use it to speculate. This money has low velocity--it doesn't change hands in domestic commerce frequently.
6. Net federal spending is measured by the federal deficit, i.e. the deficit measures the net flow of money to people, businesses and state & local govs.
7. Thus in order to get the new money the private sector needs, the federal deficit must be larger than the trade deficit. We have a large trade deficit. We need a large deficit.
8. This explains the above history. It should be noted that deficits are necessary to avoid disaster, but not sufficient. For example the deficit spending must put high velocity money into the private sector, e.g. infrastructure spending was about 5 times better than the Bush tax cuts
9. On the other hand, in 1946 we had the largest debt ratio in our history. The public debt ratio was 45% larger than today. We had deficits for 21 of the next 27 years. We increased the debt 75%.
And we had Great Prosperity.
1. We need money to conduct commerce.
2, As the economy grows we need more money.
3. Money can come to the private sector from 2 places--the federal government or from a favorable trade balance.
4. Money comes from the federal government in 2 ways--spending (fiscal) or from the FED to the banks (monetary).
5, The FED has sent a lot of money to the banks with little effect. The money has sat in the vaults of the banks or been lent to the Rich who use it to speculate. This money has low velocity--it doesn't change hands in domestic commerce frequently.
6. Net federal spending is measured by the federal deficit, i.e. the deficit measures the net flow of money to people, businesses and state & local govs.
7. Thus in order to get the new money the private sector needs, the federal deficit must be larger than the trade deficit. We have a large trade deficit. We need a large deficit.
8. This explains the above history. It should be noted that deficits are necessary to avoid disaster, but not sufficient. For example the deficit spending must put high velocity money into the private sector, e.g. infrastructure spending was about 5 times better than the Bush tax cuts
9. On the other hand, in 1946 we had the largest debt ratio in our history. The public debt ratio was 45% larger than today. We had deficits for 21 of the next 27 years. We increased the debt 75%.
And we had Great Prosperity.
8
You might want to look to more recent history. The budget was balanced and the deficit and debt were both coming down during the Clinton administration.
This was the effect of the "economy crushing" tax increases passed by a Democratic Congress at the beginning of his administration.
The economy was booming and then the Republicans under GW Bush passed massive tax cuts and ran a massive war "off budget."
This was the effect of the "economy crushing" tax increases passed by a Democratic Congress at the beginning of his administration.
The economy was booming and then the Republicans under GW Bush passed massive tax cuts and ran a massive war "off budget."
6
David, the small Clinton surpluses did not last long enough to cause an immediate depression. They only paid down the debt 9%, but they did contribute to the crash in 2008.
The first chart at http://www.slideshare. net/MitchGreen/mmt-basics-you- cannot-consider-the- deficit-in-isolation shows what happened.
In the 1990's spending and the deficit were reduced. The flow of money out of the federal sector was reduced.
Simultaneously the flow of money into the private sector was reduced. Then in about 1996 money began to flow out of the private sector, out of the country in fact. In about 1998, Money started flowing into the federal sector. This is the Clinton surplus. Money was rapidly flowing out of the private sector.
In 2001, the Bush administration started, and we had deficits again, but our trade deficit was really large. Except for a brief period in 2003, the Bush deficits were not large enough to compensate for the money going out of the country. Money still flowed out of the private sector.
People then turned to banks to get money. Private debt exploded. But the banks could create only so much money.
Finally in 2008, the economy crashes. Now there certainly were other factors which contributed to the 2008 crash. e.g. high inequality meant the Rich had excess money to speculate with, but the cumulative effect of money leaving the private sector from about 1996 to 2008 and the resultant huge increase in private debt was the main cause.
The first chart at http://www.slideshare. net/MitchGreen/mmt-basics-you- cannot-consider-the- deficit-in-isolation shows what happened.
In the 1990's spending and the deficit were reduced. The flow of money out of the federal sector was reduced.
Simultaneously the flow of money into the private sector was reduced. Then in about 1996 money began to flow out of the private sector, out of the country in fact. In about 1998, Money started flowing into the federal sector. This is the Clinton surplus. Money was rapidly flowing out of the private sector.
In 2001, the Bush administration started, and we had deficits again, but our trade deficit was really large. Except for a brief period in 2003, the Bush deficits were not large enough to compensate for the money going out of the country. Money still flowed out of the private sector.
People then turned to banks to get money. Private debt exploded. But the banks could create only so much money.
Finally in 2008, the economy crashes. Now there certainly were other factors which contributed to the 2008 crash. e.g. high inequality meant the Rich had excess money to speculate with, but the cumulative effect of money leaving the private sector from about 1996 to 2008 and the resultant huge increase in private debt was the main cause.
1
I have seen block grants in effect when I worked in Child Protection for the State of NH. The size of the grant is based on averages for the past X number of years, and doesn't factor in any kind of inflation or bad economic times and let me tell you, the Fed Government ALWAYS begins block grants in times of hardship for average families. Now with the amounts of Federal monies reduced states are expected to do at least as much with less, or preferably even more. Can't be done! Block grant medicaid and state after state will be looking to cut reimbursement rates. Let me tell you another thing: theoretically each state has to provide at least a minimum of dental care for children receiving medicaid. In the states I am most familiar with, New Hampshire, Massachusetts and now Florida finding a dentist to accept medicaid patients is like finding a ten dollar bill on the street that someone hasn't grabbed before you saw it. Absolutely true story: I had a child with a reasonably healthy tooth that needed a root canal which would save that tooth and 2 others around it, but I couldn't find a dentist ANYWHERE in the State of NH who would do this root canal at medicaid reimbursement rates. Finally I found a local dentist who was the same religion as I was and he agreed to do it provided he did not have to bill medicaid, he would do it FREE but only free because if he got 1 cent from medicaid he opened his practice to having to accept any medicaid patients who came along.
16
Thank goodness for The Salvation Army and other mission-based organizations with teams of volunteers and leaders who are committed to serving the basic needs of members of our community. With Trump's proposed budget cuts, these great organizations only rise in importance.
2
They will be a drop in the bucket of need created by these immoral cuts.
7
Mr. Rattner laments, “That means that President Trump, who vowed during the campaign not to touch Medicaid, now wants to cut it in half by 2027. He must really, really not like the poor.”
Well, Ben Carson, Trump’s HUD Secretary, said recently, “Poverty is a state of mind,” implying why does it require so much government assistance to alleviate it? So according to the Trump administration, poor people have to simply start thinking rich and they’ll get there. Also, the basis for Trump’s reverse Robin Hood budget proposal is Speaker Paul Ryan’s six-point grand plan, which is chillingly called, “A Better Way.”
These modern-day Judases might believe robbing the poor of their basic necessities to further line the pockets of the rich is “a better way,” but it is most certainly not the Christian way. At the rate Republicans are going, “Christian conservative” will soon become an oxymoron.
Well, Ben Carson, Trump’s HUD Secretary, said recently, “Poverty is a state of mind,” implying why does it require so much government assistance to alleviate it? So according to the Trump administration, poor people have to simply start thinking rich and they’ll get there. Also, the basis for Trump’s reverse Robin Hood budget proposal is Speaker Paul Ryan’s six-point grand plan, which is chillingly called, “A Better Way.”
These modern-day Judases might believe robbing the poor of their basic necessities to further line the pockets of the rich is “a better way,” but it is most certainly not the Christian way. At the rate Republicans are going, “Christian conservative” will soon become an oxymoron.
12
"More than 74 million Americans, many of them impoverished single mothers, receive Medicaid"
74m is almost 1/4th of the total US population. Those above 65 years are of course on Medicare to which they contributed. I am not sure that the tax-payers of this country ever signed up to support such a large fraction of the population on Medicaid.
And "impoverished single mothers" should not be having children outside a stable relationship with a man who has the income to take care of the family.
74m is almost 1/4th of the total US population. Those above 65 years are of course on Medicare to which they contributed. I am not sure that the tax-payers of this country ever signed up to support such a large fraction of the population on Medicaid.
And "impoverished single mothers" should not be having children outside a stable relationship with a man who has the income to take care of the family.
5
If the jobs available to working class women paid a decent wage and had benefits, many fewer women would need Medicaid. This is a classic case of socializing expense in order to maximize private profit.
11
Some of the Medicaid recipients are over the age of 65. The very poor, very elderly are in nursing homes paid for by Medicaid.
17
I am not clear why we are focused just on the poor. Certainly there is much to champion and I applaud Mr. Rattner for doing so.
The problem is the middle class. Or really, the diminishing middle class. That is what the poor, if we had an economy that could produce adequate good paying jobs, would aspire to. The poor and the government are the favorite bogeymen of right wing voters who direct their vitriol in those two directions. Cluelessly, in thinking they are punishing both those entities, GOP voters are voting to vanguish themselves as an economic class in the name of tax cuts for the rich.
Medicaid allows workers to place aging parents in nursing homes. Education spending once allowed social mobility and betterment. Tax codes permitted home mortgages to be subsidized. Veterans benefits helped build the post war middle class. So much was done by the government to promote widespread prosperity.
Later, unions were busted, pension plans effectively stolen, benefits gutted, jobs shipped elsewhere. Right wing voters, in punishing those thought undeserving by being worse off, have gutted their own protections and prosperity. And they will continue to fall for this bait and switch while the GOP continues the massive income redistribution to the 1%. They never catch on that in their representative's estimation, by not being already well off, they have become government waste while the elites do everything possible to kick the ladder out and protect their own gains.
The problem is the middle class. Or really, the diminishing middle class. That is what the poor, if we had an economy that could produce adequate good paying jobs, would aspire to. The poor and the government are the favorite bogeymen of right wing voters who direct their vitriol in those two directions. Cluelessly, in thinking they are punishing both those entities, GOP voters are voting to vanguish themselves as an economic class in the name of tax cuts for the rich.
Medicaid allows workers to place aging parents in nursing homes. Education spending once allowed social mobility and betterment. Tax codes permitted home mortgages to be subsidized. Veterans benefits helped build the post war middle class. So much was done by the government to promote widespread prosperity.
Later, unions were busted, pension plans effectively stolen, benefits gutted, jobs shipped elsewhere. Right wing voters, in punishing those thought undeserving by being worse off, have gutted their own protections and prosperity. And they will continue to fall for this bait and switch while the GOP continues the massive income redistribution to the 1%. They never catch on that in their representative's estimation, by not being already well off, they have become government waste while the elites do everything possible to kick the ladder out and protect their own gains.
33
Have we always named our budgets? Just the idea that the cover of the budget is called "A New Foundation For American Greatness" is really enough to make me puke.
"Sell Sell Sell," I guess.
"Sell Sell Sell," I guess.
21
At this point, how can anyone be surprised that a Trump promise might not be met or will have the exact opposite effect of the promise. It's lucky his budget is dead on arrival because it's effect on the American people would cause death on a scale that could not be met by any outside terrorist group. I have a friend who is always frustrated by his neer do well son. His son just had twins and looked like he might have turned a corner brought about by the seriousness of fatherhood. He received a substantial tax return because of his new deductibles and when my friend asked what he did with the unexpected windfall his son told him he bought two more guns to add to his collection of two, to protect his family. This kid, with his bad start in life (mom and dad divorced when he was young), his lack of education (only half of high school), his dalliance with drugs and constant poverty, has an excuse for being bad with money. What is Trump's excuse, because he's, basically, making the same budget decisions.
14
A proposal that demonstrates an utter disdain for numerical integrity is no more a "budget" than a campaign statement that shows an utter disdain for honesty is a"promise" or a press conference announcement that shows an utter disdain for the truth is a "fact".
We can now officially add "budget" to the ever growing list of words that are meaningless in a Trump administration.
We can now officially add "budget" to the ever growing list of words that are meaningless in a Trump administration.
11
Since Reagan, being objective and honest, one would have to say that the Republican agenda has terrorized and killed more Americans than Al Qaeda and ISIS could ever accomplish in their wildest fantasies.
60
The first budget ever that needed a title, like a movie.
7
The likelihood that this proposed budget would get through the House and Senate untouched is remote. But as they say; "It's the thought that counts". The words compassion, truth, honesty, and kindness are not in this Administrations vocabulary. What is though are words like, indifference, mercilessness, meanness, and uncaring.
This is the most unscrupulous Administration I have seen in my 74 years, and I swear they are at war with the poor and needy citizens of our country. A much greater threat than terrorists or the like.
This is the most unscrupulous Administration I have seen in my 74 years, and I swear they are at war with the poor and needy citizens of our country. A much greater threat than terrorists or the like.
10
"The likelihood that this proposed budget would get through the House and Senate untouched is remote."
That may be, but it's philosophically right in line with the Republicans' thinking. If they change it, it will be to pass something that looks better by comparison, hoping to cover their rear ends at election time. Even if it's only half as bad, it will still be a savage measure.
Republicans somehow have the name for being the more fiscally responsible party, but historically the Democrats have always been better stewards of the nation's money, and governed better for the common people.
That may be, but it's philosophically right in line with the Republicans' thinking. If they change it, it will be to pass something that looks better by comparison, hoping to cover their rear ends at election time. Even if it's only half as bad, it will still be a savage measure.
Republicans somehow have the name for being the more fiscally responsible party, but historically the Democrats have always been better stewards of the nation's money, and governed better for the common people.
7
While Trump is cutting medicaid and hurting people, he merrily squanders millions in his weekly trip to his den in Florida. This is in keeping with his dishonesty at every level. We don't hear any Republican questioning this waste of tax payer money. The US is in for bad times with this Putin's mole.
35
The biggest problem I see is that if the Republicans retain both Houses in 2018, and the presidency and both Houses in 2020, all restraint will go out the window, and these will look like the good times. Frankly, I've had the feeling that the Democrats are waiting for a severe depression/ recession so they can run the country for the next 50 years. BTW- I'm a liberal Democrat, disgusted one, at that.
Get up and fight, Democrats in Congress. Delay, obfuscate, filibuster, whatever. This is what's at stake.
Get up and fight, Democrats in Congress. Delay, obfuscate, filibuster, whatever. This is what's at stake.
19
The poor, sick, and the elderly always been the low hanging fruit to suffer the most under a GOP regime. For they see poverty as a personal failing even much as a moral sin to be in poverty. They say they believe in personal responsibility and pull yourself up by the bootstrap approach to be successful. How can those entrenched in poverty pull themselves up when even the 'bootstraps' are taken from them? The less federal money spent on anti-poverty programs will increase poverty not eradicate it.
11
Why do Trump and Mulvaney hate America and Americans so much?
20
What should we expect from a ¨successful real estate developer¨ who lost almost a billion dollars of other peoples money in the 1990´s? A man who uses his golf members country club fees as part of a ¨slush fund¨ to use as he sees fit. The ¨King of Debt¨ who will ruin our economy and sacrifice our children's future so the top 1% can enjoy an few extra villa´s in Europe.
12
The hatchet job which has been submitted by djt as if it were a budget, is a GOP'er donor wish list that includes everything right down to the kitchen sink.
It is not a serious economic document because such cuts would collapse the economy, just as we have seen each time voodoo trickle-downism has reared its ugly head.
However, that's a feature not a bug, from GOPers' standpoint, since we know djt advisor Steve Bannon's goal as a self-proclaimed Leninist is to destroy the State.
Any part of the economy which is as big as the federal budget, cannot be cut the way they pretend, without serious repercussions - and they know it, since they would never cut the operating budget of any djt family property in the same way, without expecting that property to suffer.
The so-called budget is a sham and a vicious scam, which Mulvaney can't even get to add up.
And they don't care - because dogma.
It is not a serious economic document because such cuts would collapse the economy, just as we have seen each time voodoo trickle-downism has reared its ugly head.
However, that's a feature not a bug, from GOPers' standpoint, since we know djt advisor Steve Bannon's goal as a self-proclaimed Leninist is to destroy the State.
Any part of the economy which is as big as the federal budget, cannot be cut the way they pretend, without serious repercussions - and they know it, since they would never cut the operating budget of any djt family property in the same way, without expecting that property to suffer.
The so-called budget is a sham and a vicious scam, which Mulvaney can't even get to add up.
And they don't care - because dogma.
63
R.
The document is not so much a budget as a neoliberal manifesto.
Although neoliberal is the right word it is wrong in oh so many ways as everyone from Paul Krugman, Hilary Clinton, Paul Ryan and The Prez are at their core neoliberals.
Neoliberalism is neither new nor liberal and I can only recall Shelly's Ozymandias that does justice to this perverse philosophy.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/resources/learning/core-poems/detail/46565
The document is not so much a budget as a neoliberal manifesto.
Although neoliberal is the right word it is wrong in oh so many ways as everyone from Paul Krugman, Hilary Clinton, Paul Ryan and The Prez are at their core neoliberals.
Neoliberalism is neither new nor liberal and I can only recall Shelly's Ozymandias that does justice to this perverse philosophy.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/resources/learning/core-poems/detail/46565
1
When I reflect on the slow decay of the quality of government services in the modern era in America, I often wonder what force drives the US to these extremes. Is America doomed to not care for its poor through some inherent character trait that only people in this nation possess? I hope not, but the political climate here is unlike anything I have ever encountered anywhere. I hope for the best, but when I am honest with myself I am not optimistic.
79
If anything resembling Trump's budget actually makes it through Congress, then finally, FINALLY, anti-government conservatives will start to see all around them what "limited government" as they understand the term would actually look like.
The problem with them learning this lesson, though, is the enormous suffering it will cause the poor, along with the weakening of the economy for everyone else.
Imagine a situation worse that the Great Depression in America's city streets. Not to mentioned the ballooning deficits we'll start to see again.
Is this the course we have to take in this country before we can finally convince the voting public of how completely unrealistic, uncompromising and mean-spirited the modern Republican party has become?
Remember, they weren't able to do this under Reagan or Bush 43 because Democrats had some control in Congress and they had to work with them.
Not any more.
The problem with them learning this lesson, though, is the enormous suffering it will cause the poor, along with the weakening of the economy for everyone else.
Imagine a situation worse that the Great Depression in America's city streets. Not to mentioned the ballooning deficits we'll start to see again.
Is this the course we have to take in this country before we can finally convince the voting public of how completely unrealistic, uncompromising and mean-spirited the modern Republican party has become?
Remember, they weren't able to do this under Reagan or Bush 43 because Democrats had some control in Congress and they had to work with them.
Not any more.
97
To a certain kind of people, warning them that the stove is hot and will burn them smacks of elitist condescension.
You can tell them they shouldn't touch the stove as much as you like, but all you'll do is annoy them with your pretentious claims of expertise. Yes, yes, YOU say the red glow is a sign of intense heat; and YOU say the ripple in the air above the stove is another sign. . .but who are you to tell them what things mean, let alone claim you see a 'ripple in the air'?
They need to touch the stove.
You can tell them they shouldn't touch the stove as much as you like, but all you'll do is annoy them with your pretentious claims of expertise. Yes, yes, YOU say the red glow is a sign of intense heat; and YOU say the ripple in the air above the stove is another sign. . .but who are you to tell them what things mean, let alone claim you see a 'ripple in the air'?
They need to touch the stove.
8
Ok, I'm not sure *exactly* what this means, but apparently I'm the "condescending elitist" here.
So, how about this? This is who I am to tell them.
1) The Congressional Budget Office says 23 million people will lose health insurance. That's not a figure I arrived at elite condescension.
2) And here's another non-elite and non-condescending figure: he wants to cut the medicare budget by half in ten years. Do you know how low someone's income must be to qualify for medicare? I don't, because my elitist ways (working 4 part-time jobs) have prevented me from being able to purchase affordable health insurance, so I don't have any. But I have heard one has to have an extremely low income, and with this budget, people will presumably have to have even lower one.
But hey, I'll tell you what: if my jobs don't disappear in the next four years I'm break out of my elite condescension and contribute to charities that support the hungry. Because without being too judgmental and condescending, I've got a feeling they're going to need more assistance.
So, how about this? This is who I am to tell them.
1) The Congressional Budget Office says 23 million people will lose health insurance. That's not a figure I arrived at elite condescension.
2) And here's another non-elite and non-condescending figure: he wants to cut the medicare budget by half in ten years. Do you know how low someone's income must be to qualify for medicare? I don't, because my elitist ways (working 4 part-time jobs) have prevented me from being able to purchase affordable health insurance, so I don't have any. But I have heard one has to have an extremely low income, and with this budget, people will presumably have to have even lower one.
But hey, I'll tell you what: if my jobs don't disappear in the next four years I'm break out of my elite condescension and contribute to charities that support the hungry. Because without being too judgmental and condescending, I've got a feeling they're going to need more assistance.
6
Bryan, they had to do it in Kansas before those folks took the criticism seriously. Now they haven't enough for their schools and other necessities.
3
It's not just the poor that Trump hates. Perhaps in a future column Mr. Rattner can address the multiplier effect. Military spending creates jobs, but far fewer than spending the same amount on health care (despite our having the most inefficient system in the Western world), infrastructure, alternative clean energy sources, or just about anything else besides the military.
Those cuts to Medicaid don't just hurt the recipients. What about the doctors that rely on that income, and the staff employed in their offices? How many hospitals will be left in dire financial straits? How many will shutter their doors?
Government spending may have problems with waste and corruption. But it's a huge employer, and we're talking non-minimum wage jobs with benefits. It's a huge driver of the economy. Slashing spending in such a careless manner will do enough damage to the economy to plunge us into a recession. Throw in the proposed tax cuts taking money from the poor (who circulate every dollar they earn or receive) while the rich are buying everything they want and stashing the rest in offshore banks or Wall Street, and you're talking about a recession becoming a depression. Since we're still the world's largest economy, the effects will quickly ripple overseas.
2008 is going to look like a picnic if our (I'm very very smart) successful businessman (who won't release his tax returns and can't get loans from Western banks) somehow implements his satanic policies.
Those cuts to Medicaid don't just hurt the recipients. What about the doctors that rely on that income, and the staff employed in their offices? How many hospitals will be left in dire financial straits? How many will shutter their doors?
Government spending may have problems with waste and corruption. But it's a huge employer, and we're talking non-minimum wage jobs with benefits. It's a huge driver of the economy. Slashing spending in such a careless manner will do enough damage to the economy to plunge us into a recession. Throw in the proposed tax cuts taking money from the poor (who circulate every dollar they earn or receive) while the rich are buying everything they want and stashing the rest in offshore banks or Wall Street, and you're talking about a recession becoming a depression. Since we're still the world's largest economy, the effects will quickly ripple overseas.
2008 is going to look like a picnic if our (I'm very very smart) successful businessman (who won't release his tax returns and can't get loans from Western banks) somehow implements his satanic policies.
128
Some figures:
Stimulus benefit for each dollar spent (source: Moody’s):
$0.29 – Bush income tax cuts
$0.30 – Corporate tax cut
$0.37 – Dividend and capital gains tax cuts
$1.36 – Aid to states
$1.59 – Infrastructure spending
$1.64 – Unemployment benefits
$1.70 – Food stamps
Stimulus benefit for each dollar spent (source: Moody’s):
$0.29 – Bush income tax cuts
$0.30 – Corporate tax cut
$0.37 – Dividend and capital gains tax cuts
$1.36 – Aid to states
$1.59 – Infrastructure spending
$1.64 – Unemployment benefits
$1.70 – Food stamps
21
Thanks that's very interesting. Of course, someone who watches Fox News will accusing you of elitist liberal lies before the night is out.
(but DON'T listen to them!)
(but DON'T listen to them!)
7
Yes, this is like a double amputation. Pick ANY two limbs, NO anesthesia.
For those that actually voted for this admitted serial molester, enjoy. I hope that you get at least a portion of what you deserve. Of course, I say this for your own good. You must work for everything. No " takers " allowed. All healthcare is a privilege. Earn it, or die. Quickly.
For those that actually voted for this admitted serial molester, enjoy. I hope that you get at least a portion of what you deserve. Of course, I say this for your own good. You must work for everything. No " takers " allowed. All healthcare is a privilege. Earn it, or die. Quickly.
63
I've spent my entire life doing my best to give every person a equal chance, not so much now. The other day I actually said too myself, I hope each and every one of trumps supporters suffers the most horrific and painful death because of there stupidity. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander.
7
Where will the future economic refugees migrate to when their home towns have less than nothing to offer? To the cities, swellings the ranks of the homeless and street dwellers. The future will resemble a Dickensian landscape of hungry and sick children and families abandoned by the breadcrumb winners. The well off will insist there are plenty of programs for the indigent therefore wringing their money counting hands of any blame which they may or may not be partners to. The few Charities remaining will offer soup kitchens reminiscent of the newsreels of the 1930's and the rich will complain the public isn't grateful enough for 'all' that is simply given to them. " We don't have to feed you, besides you appear to be 'able-bodied' to me go find a job, there are plenty of them over there, you're just not looking hard enough". So the rant will go as they absolve themselves of any responsibility for benefiting so mightily at the cost in lives of 10's of millions of unknown, faceless hungry people and families.
47
And please remember that being poor is "just a state of mind" according to our sleepy Secretary of HUD.
7
The covfefe Tweeter's berserk
Revealing himself as a jerk,
We'll end up mañana
A republic banana
Where all furtive billionaires lurk.
Revealing himself as a jerk,
We'll end up mañana
A republic banana
Where all furtive billionaires lurk.
142
Given that Federal taxes and spending result in massive transfers from Blue to Red States, that account for as much as 41% of state GDP in those Red States, the Trump budget would cause many deep Red State recessions. Blue States would keep a lot more money at home, boosting their economies and social spending.
This is a very curious plan for a GOP President. Mitch McConnell was quick to make clear it would be generally ignored by the Senate.
So why put a plan out that 1) is a economic tsunami for the states that voted for you and 2) has no chance of being enacted?
Because virtually everything Trump does is about symbolism, largely devoid of real impact, but carefully tailored to the prejudices of his base.
The people who voted for him believe that their desire for good paying (low skilled) jobs is ignored while the government focuses on minorities and the poor, who they incorrectly see as non-working dependents of the Federal government.
So Trump wins with his base when the media and public in general decry his cruelty.
Democrats might consider pushing for lower Federal spending and more state spending. That is exactly what has happened with infrastructure, as Federal gas taxes declined, many states made up the difference and have much smaller backlogs of needed repairs.
This is a very curious plan for a GOP President. Mitch McConnell was quick to make clear it would be generally ignored by the Senate.
So why put a plan out that 1) is a economic tsunami for the states that voted for you and 2) has no chance of being enacted?
Because virtually everything Trump does is about symbolism, largely devoid of real impact, but carefully tailored to the prejudices of his base.
The people who voted for him believe that their desire for good paying (low skilled) jobs is ignored while the government focuses on minorities and the poor, who they incorrectly see as non-working dependents of the Federal government.
So Trump wins with his base when the media and public in general decry his cruelty.
Democrats might consider pushing for lower Federal spending and more state spending. That is exactly what has happened with infrastructure, as Federal gas taxes declined, many states made up the difference and have much smaller backlogs of needed repairs.
72
This all sounds reasonable, but by "lower Federal spending" I think the Democrats have to be talking in non-Draconian terms, no? And that could be anything from small cuts to smaller increases when it comes to something like Medicaid.
4
There's absolutely no doubt that this budget is part of the Republican plan to "reduce the government until you can drown it in a bathtub." Somewhere, Grover Norquist is declaring victory.
The problem is, all Americans lose when our children don't have access to healthcare, when our roads and bridges crumble, when our research programs fall behind those of other countries.
Wealthy Americans may take short-term delight in their tax cuts, happy that the "takers" are taking less. But they will suffer right along with the rest of us when this great nation becomes a second-rate has-been.
The problem is, all Americans lose when our children don't have access to healthcare, when our roads and bridges crumble, when our research programs fall behind those of other countries.
Wealthy Americans may take short-term delight in their tax cuts, happy that the "takers" are taking less. But they will suffer right along with the rest of us when this great nation becomes a second-rate has-been.
181
I think we've been heading toward "has-been" status for some time already.
And I think Bill Clinton AND Barack Obama WERE willing to make some compromises and conceded that we can't ask the government to do everything.
But the world is getting more competitive and more integrated, and we simply can't go back to a Jeffersonian plan for a tiny government like Grover Norquist wants.
Politicians must compromise over the growth of programs that care for the neediest people, but letting people go hungry or be denied medical treatment isn't just immoral--at some point it will become anarchy. I don't know how we can maintain the infrastructure and law and order necessary for a free enterprise system if we try to shrink government spending back to the levels of decades ago.
Is any country in the world that doesn't have masses of homeless people doing that and still fostering economic growth?
And I think Bill Clinton AND Barack Obama WERE willing to make some compromises and conceded that we can't ask the government to do everything.
But the world is getting more competitive and more integrated, and we simply can't go back to a Jeffersonian plan for a tiny government like Grover Norquist wants.
Politicians must compromise over the growth of programs that care for the neediest people, but letting people go hungry or be denied medical treatment isn't just immoral--at some point it will become anarchy. I don't know how we can maintain the infrastructure and law and order necessary for a free enterprise system if we try to shrink government spending back to the levels of decades ago.
Is any country in the world that doesn't have masses of homeless people doing that and still fostering economic growth?
7