Yesterday on Dylan Ratigan’s show, he asked Austan Goolsbee a question I submitted via Twitter. It’s something I’ve been asking here as well: how are you going to perpetuate the stimulative effect of this bill, when you have deficit hysteria breaking out in Washington and a new Tea Party caucus bound and determined to cut spending next year? Goolsbee’s answer made it seem like he never considered the question:
Well, that’s an interesting issue. I think the President has said that in the medium run and long run, we’ve got to confront the fiscal imbalances that have faced the country, and that we’ve known about for 10, 20, 30 years. So I don’t think he’s afraid to think through and confront the medium-run fiscal challenge. I think it would be a big mistake if we pass the tax deal, and that we were to immediately try to reverse it, but I don’t think the President would go along with that.
Goolsbee knows the President better than I do, but for what it’s worth, here’s the aforementioned Mr. Obama on NPR today:
OBAMA: Well, we’re going to have a long discussion next year about spending. I put together a fiscal commission — over the resistance, I should note, of a number of Republicans who originally had supported it.
I think that Bowles-Simpson did a good job of sparking a conversation about how we need to move forward to deal with our medium- and long-term deficits. There have been other commissions that have been put forward over the last several weeks.
And I’m going to have to put a budget up that shows how I think we make some — a serious dent in our debt and our deficit. I think every economist — and by the way, the commissions who looked at this as well, realize that because we’ve got a recovery that is still not as strong as we’d like it to be.
The vast majority of economists, as well as both the chairman of the Bowles-Simpson commission, as well as other commissions, have suggested that because the recovery is just taking off and is still not producing as many jobs as it needs to, that it actually makes sense for us not do anything that contracts the economy right now because the single most important thing we can do for deficit reduction is actually expand economic growth.
That 1 percent of additional economic growth brings in a whole lot of revenue even with no changes in the tax code.
INSKEEP: That’s what they’re saying the payroll tax will do — is 1 percent.
OBAMA: And so the payroll tax provision that is included in this package is going to help spark economic growth that will help. Now, it doesn’t solve our medium- and long-term problems, so we’re going to still have to make some very tough decisions — and these, too, are going to be unpopular.
And I promise, I’m going to get criticism from Democrats and Republicans throughout the year in terms of the choices that I am going to be forcing Congress to take a square look at. Because, look, the fact of the matter is that for a decade now, we have had the tendency to think that we can keep on having all the services we want and we keep them — can keep cutting taxes as much as we want and that somehow things are going to magically balance out.
The American people understand that’s not the case, and so we’re going to have to be responsible about thinking: What are the programs we don’t need, that don’t contribute to growth, don’t contribute to competitiveness, don’t make sure our kids are — aren’t contributing to making sure that our kids are learning and able to compete in this 21st century economy, and which things are vital investments that we have to make?
And that conversation is going to be one that can’t just happen in Washington; it’s going to happen all across the country. And I’m looking forward to leading that conversation.
The President thinks he can confine this to a conversation. But notice the part that I highlighted – he’s saying that parts of his next budget – for fiscal year 2012 – will have to show steps to “a serious dent in our debt and our deficit.” Keep in mind that the FY2011 budget – passed by a House with large Democratic majorities – already reduced the President’s baseline budget by $46 billion dollars. That will be the absolute least of what will be wiped out in the next year or two, with a Republican House and a Senate with a Budget Committee chair itching for austerity. And of course, that’s without even mentioning the debt limit.
Today, the New York Times reports that the President wants to put tax reform at the top of the agenda. In theory, broadening the base and eliminating tax earmarks is a good idea. In practice, this will flatten the rates, in all likelihood, and pit the voiceless poor with a very powerful and influential ruling class. I don’t like the odds. On net, the President wants to raise revenues in this deal, and that’s both possible and preferable. But you’re going to necessarily pick winners and losers if you go through with this, and I know who the Republican House sees as whom. Dave Camp, incoming House Ways and Means Committee chair, wants
tax reform, but a very specific kind.
It’s positive, I suppose, that the President skipped the meeting yesterday with the catfood commission, but he certainly wasted no time talking it up with NPR. The vultures are circling for austerity, and they’re not necessarily on the same time schedule to accommodate 2011-2012 stimulus. I don’t see how anyone gets out of this box with the full stimulative effect intact.
UPDATE: Here is specifically what Kent Conrad said after meeting with the Catfood Commission and White House officials yesterday:
“At today’s meeting, I joined other Commission members in urging the Obama Administration to move quickly to engage in serious and sustained bipartisan talks on a long-term deficit reduction package. We must have the Administration and the bipartisan leadership in the House and Senate involved in these discussions.
“The Commission’s plan presents a good starting point for negotiations. In the coming year, we need to reach conclusion on a specific bipartisan package that can actually be enacted to bring our debt under control. We can’t afford to put this off any further. Our nation’s long-term economic security is at stake. The coming vote on another debt limit increase is likely to be a critical catalyst for jump-starting these bipartisan discussions.”
Definitely sounds like he wants to wait.



56 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Here’s what jumped out at me from that NPR interview:
Gah. Third rail? Third party.
well then, here’s the answer I can predict straight up
“we deal with the long term debt that has to do with entitlements like social security by undermining it’s funding structure, by capitulating and destroying it’s solvency, all making believe we are giving the middle class some kind of tax break, calling it a ‘tax holiday’”
see how easy that was?
obama is clearly and deliberately making social security insolvent because it will be hard to say it’s insolvent unless it is
now that he’s undermined it’s funding structure, that’s another blow to it’s solvency, more to come, more to come
Liar, Liar, and Obama is a first class Liar. No, fool, it is not Social Security. Obama and his puppeteers never talk about their highly profitable wars. Profitable for Obama’s Wall Street Overlords. Not profitable for the medium term, long term or short term for us taxpayers who are forced to pay for Obama’s wars.
Stop the goddamn wars and balance the budget.
that would be number one, number two would be;
“stop giving the damn middle class assets to the wealthiest people on the planet and balance the budget”
When I saw that Obama rolled out Bill Clinton today to get some cover for his pos “deal,” I could only think one thing:
Even Obama now thinks that Hillary should have one.
He’s running to Bill Clinton to dig him out of this mess? Really?
David. I can’t give you the citation for this, but I did read that Moody’s Rating agency said that they would agree to the tax cuts extensions because they believed that the 4 trillion dollars added to the deficit would be cancelled out by the 4 trillion dollars in cuts made by the Catfood commission. The grand bargain returns.
Absolutely. He had to bring the Big Dog to save himself. Made me laugh a lot. Obama is pathetic.
Well, he DID have a party to attend. It’s consistent with Obama’s approach to everything. He doesn’t like to get his hands dirty. It’s the President Who Wasn’t There.
Wow. The President of the United States, supposedly a Constitutional scholar to boot, doesn’t even know that SOCIAL SECURITY IS FORBIDDEN BY LAW TO EVER ADD A PENNY TO THE DEFICIT.
What a fucking liar.
I so wish someone doing an interview with him when he says that next time follows up by reading the damned law directly to him.
Social Security has never and will never add a penny to the deficit or the debt. It can’t. It’s forbidden by the Social Security Act itself.
Asshole.
Oops.
Sorry. LOL. It seems lots of folks above already picked up that distrubing paragraph at the NPR link.
Think I owe several folks a drink.
Give the House a round, beertender.
I admit that I despised George Bush.
Obama has stirred even deeper feelings.
Both Bush and Obama may well be only “tools”, however the treachery of Obama easily surpasses the delight Bush took in harming beings he perceived as weaker than himself; Obama doesn’t even acknowledge that anyone outside of his “network” actually exists.
The pathologies of this nation’s “brightest and be$t match and may well yet surpass those of ANY historic despot or “entitled” class.
DW
President Potemkin.
Also: the prez who thinks his shit doesn’t smell.
Shorter Eugene Robinson:
This “deal” sucks.
Obama is so secure that he’ll leave Bill Clinton at a press conference to fight his battles for him and win over people that he can’t.
Obama should have worked harder on this issue starting a year ago, but no one should be angry at him for having done nothing then or for acting now like Americans should be happy to eat his shit taco.
This pos “deal” should pass.
In the long term, we’ll all be dead. /s
While what you say is true, OFG, what Obama says is true-ish, also. Obama’s goal, formulated before he was elected, was to gut Social Security & Medicare.
We been taking him for a weakling and a coward when he is in fact a malevolent manpipulator. He knows he can conflate & confuse the issues of SS and the deficit in the minds of the public. He knows he has republicans (and lots of Democrats) behind him. He knows the MSM will ignore defenders of the safety net. Obama is a cold, hard, mean SOB who is intent on destroying Social Security. That is the road we’re heading down and he is taking us.
Pivoting from snark to a serious point:
As of today, I am a father (my stepson is now my son). My grandchildren should not have to pay later for giveaways to the super wealthy today.
I had to mute the TV during Robinson.
Eh, a optimistic knight, after a most interesting day.
(Sanders easily outclassed and completely out-truthed Obama-Clinton.)
;~DW
Congratulations!
Congratulations! Being a parent is wonderful challenge. Enjoy.
Congrats, Knoxville.
DW
I voted for this DINO President, although I was bothered by the fact that he was supported by banksters like Goldman-Sachs. Now I realize he was the Manchurian Candidate of the super-wealthy, and will NOT be tricked into voting for him again. Dems better get another candidate for 2012.
Look for a flood of Republican candidates like Palin vying for the Republican Pres. nomination in 2012 – they can’t lose!
Well,…. A challenge, anyhow. *g*
Thanks for the congratulations! I’ve been his father in every sense that matters to us for over three years now. But it is great to finally have given him my name and to have legal recognition of my role. We all went to a studio today after the proceedings to have professional pictures taken. Whole family’s very happy!
Congrats to you knoxville, that’s good news, and I *do* take this stuff seriously, but either you laugh or cry, and I’m done crying. Maybe a 2nd stock market crash will wake people up, but I doubt it. Bernie poured his heart out this afternoon, and the average joe 6-pack has no clue.
In this case, I’m lucky. He’s great! So the challenge is wonderful…
With 4 kids I can testify that it’s a challenge. I seem to have survived reasonably intact.
Heh. Ellsberg points out that Woodward revealed classified docs in Obama’s Wars and wants to see more.
That’s just what I asked Woodward about when he was here for his book salon. Wonder why he ignored my Q.
Not.
And Bernie did it for the average joe 6-pack, who oddly isn’t as willing to fight what’s happening as is Bernie. We need more like Bernie in the Senate. And if Republicans and Democrats in the House were more like Paul and Kucinich, respectively, we’d be doing just fine now.
It’s a big comeback year for the undead.
First all the vampires, then zombies, now ghouls.
Congratulations also to Knoxville. Fatherhood is very rewarding.
I have a twenty year-old son, so I know. But it is a tragedy that he has as the basis for the strongest memories of his childhood some of the worst years of governance this nation has ever known, and that his generation will quite apparently will be saddled with the deepest debt, and some of the worst intentioned leaders, including Obama, this country will ever have experienced.
I am ashamed of what the United Sates has become. We are a conscience-devoid, selfish, greedy, war-mongering people now, with no pity for the poor, no mercy for those we hold in custody, and seem to be losing more of our civil rights and common sense with each passing day.
The despair I had during Bush is easily outmatched now under Obama.
Gawd, what a crushing disappointment he and our so-called leaders are.
What you fail to understand is that when the social security trust fund starts redeeming its bonds, those funds come from the general fund. You may or may not know this ** Mod Note: Name-calling and similar provocations are prohibited at FDL. Please confine your comments to substance. **
– but money doesn’t grow on trees. Those funds either have to come from higher taxes, budget cuts in the general fund, or more borrowing.
Very well said.
nm.
Mind playing tricks on me I guess.
I believe our children’s generation is getting a crappy deal, but I also think that they have advantages that we don’t have. They’re more open-minded and tolerant, imo. Most young people ran out to support what Obama pretended to represent, which suggests that, as a demographic, most young Americans want little to do with Bush’s bs or the bs of the president Obama turned out to be.
Still, I’m not sure where we went so wrong these last couple of decades. I hope that historians in the future will be able to figure out how the
supposed geniusesassclowns were able to grab power away from the adults in this country and that future generations will make sure it never happens again.I saw it – nice response BTW…weird, however…the invisible hand at work…must be the magic of the market…or the moderators…
Why shouldn’t those funds to repay Social Security come from the General Fund? The General Fund has been using the Social Security funds as a piggybank for decades (as well as funding all those tax cuts that have caused the increasing disparity between the top and bottom of the economic strata.
It comes down to the phrase Boesky unleashed on Harvard B-school, “Greed is good”, which basically justified selfishness and enabled the clever to tempt everyone into believing that money is all that matters and how you get does not …
Coupled with literal control of the world and as much of its economies as possible, which has been national policy since BEFORE the end of WWII, the stage was set for vulture capitalism and complete social capitulation, as the public happily embraced comfort over conscience …
Ah, well, Knoxville, Sanders laid it out exceptionally well today and his approval ratings suggest a hunger for the truth.
DW
Right on DW – and I just got your joke from the other thread. you are *way* ahead of me…
Extending all Bush era budget-busting deficit-exploding tax cuts will add $4 trillion over the next ten years to federal budget deficits. Of course, this depends on when the Bush era tax cuts are revisited again, the budget-busting deficit-exploding tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans get extended, and later extended again.
The estate tax cut for wealthiest U.S. individuals and families in the Obama/GOP “compromise” adds another $1 trillion over the next ten years to the federal budget deficits.
And all the other tax cuts in the Obama/GOP “compromise” will suck even more revenue out of the federal treasury over the next ten years, starving federal funding for numerous government programs and services, adding over $1 trillion more to federal budget deficits.
And Republicans have now floated their latest talking point, that the Obama/GOP “compromise” is actually a “stimulus” which will generate jobs, jobs, job, implying that the Bush/Republican tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 generated jobs, jobs, jobs…instead of just being a boondoggle for the wealthiest 2 percent in America (and even the wealthiest around the world).
And what is really sick is that former President Clinton is now endorsing this budget-busting deficit-exploding “compromise,” even though Clinton in his second term signed legislation that got rid of Glass-Steagall (1999, Sen. Phil Gramm provision) and regulation of on-line energy trading (2000, another Sen. Phil Gramm provision, with his wife on the Enron board of directors). Also, President Clinton, following the advice of his economic advisers, weakened federal regulation of derivatives. Talk about being business-friendly, a business-friendliness that (along with what George W. Bush did) led to the near collapse of the U.S. and world economies in 2008, besides the 2001 Enron disaster.
So, adding almost $6 trillion to budget deficits over the next ten years won’t blow a hole in our federal government?
And culture of corruption and greed Republicans won’t try to plug this gaping budgetary hole with calls for cutting as many government citizen-friendly programs and services as possible?
Arch-conservative (and blood-sucking insane Republican) Grover Norquist is licking his blood-stained lips, having an orgasm right now just thinking about what Congress (and President Obama) are about to do, sucking the life blood of Uncle Sam to the very last drop.
So, why is President Obama following the Grover Norquist playbook?
Exactly. That’s equally true for the treasuries we sold the Chinese. You don’t here anyone saying Chinese debt is bankrupting the country. Because the gov’t borrowed the social security trust money from the American people it’s OK to default? Let’s take 20% off the value of U.S. savings bonds too. Every time somebody cashes one the government has to use tax money or borrow again.
Congratulations, Knox, and Best Wishes!
Congratulations I have two steps who are my kids!!
I believe any so called reform package to contain real reform only if TR or FDR kind of person signs it.
Looks for this Tax Reform to Contain VAT taxes in some form or other. This is the goal and this is the thing which will enable our great country to drop from first-world to third world status with vast majority living in Poor standard and never getting a chance to rise up even if they are inherantly hard working and smart.
The money in the trust fund was collected from workers, then given to the very wealthy in the form of tax cuts. It should be repaid by the wealthy. I suggest a 2% tax surcharge on dividends, capital gains, and income ABOVE the SS cap until the funds are repaid.
It must be the water I drink or the air I breath. The Ghoul man says that tax brakes for the rich won’t create jobs. That’s a given as the Bush tax breaks have been in place for quite some time. During that time we have lost over 7 million jobs, so it is obvious that tax breaks for the rich aren’t going to do much in that area. They want to reduce the funds going into SS, but in the same breath they say that SS is going broke, so let’s starve it a bit more.
There is an old adage in financial land. The real value of any conflict is in the debt that it creates. You control the debt and you control everything. It’s long past time for this game to end. I wonder if each of the economists that the President spoke too were the same ones that saw this train wreck coming? I think not.
Obama is not stupid.
Obama knows that once the Bush tax cut is extended the game becomes the destruction of Social Security and other programs of the left so as to meet the decreased revenues.
Obama wants the destruction of those programs of the left because he thinks being President during that destruction puts him in FDR’s league on being a “change agent”.
Re: Pity for the poor. Did you catch in the Goolsbee interview above that when asked by Ratigan if a tax hike for those making $20,000-$40,000 while the richest get a tax break is fair, Goolsbee did not want to discuss any “specific examples” and then went on to the scare tactic of warning that whatever the Republicans come up with will be worse? If it’s obvious that the “leaders” don’t give a damn about most of the citizens of the US, they sure as hell don’t give a damn about the poor. They can’t even pretend to give a shit. When a party and a President who purport to be progressive clearly don’t care if the poor and working class live or die, is it any wonder so many turn to Beck, Limbaugh, et al? At least their vicious propaganda bothers to recognize them.
And congrats to Knoxville!
Exhausting all other possibilities, I come to this conclusion as well. It’s like listening to someone explain their dissertation, grabbing at the most contorted of arguments to justify a thesis as “original.” I don’t think Obama’s a Scrooge McDuck; I think he really believes he’s charting some new course. Apple-polishers always believe they’re the smartest guys in the room.
The Stockholm Syndrome- the presidency is being held hostage. It has been for a very long time, we only think we elect them.
He knows that it smells, he just doesn’t know that it stinks.
This nation is being run by economists, the ratings agencies, the federal reserve, and Tim Geithner and his Wall Street wannabe minons.
None of these folks need or give a damn about Social Security, and they want it gone.
So it has to go.
Sorry.
(Geithner’s only concern is the stock and bond markets not the American people, he was the one who negotiated this deal with the Republicans.)
And perhaps even INCREASE tax rates on the millionaires that have stolen
our tax revenues, our pensions, our IRA’s and everything else that
wasn’t tied down. Yes, I did say INCREASE TAX RATES ON MILLIONAIRES.
Have them at least pay their fair share? Amazing!
I think it’s time WE became “change agents”. Primary anyone?
You’ve got my vote!