Myths/Obama/federal budget - Revision history

Woozle: proper header

2015-12-27T00:08:30Z

proper header

Woozle: sources of deficit

2015-12-27T00:07:38Z

sources of deficit

Woozle: graph of gov spending

2015-10-01T20:55:58Z

graph of gov spending

Woozle: another submyth

2015-07-20T22:03:37Z

another submyth

Woozle: the 70%-increase argument gets a page

2015-02-22T20:40:40Z

the 70%-increase argument gets a page

Woozle: balanced budget amendment - bad idea

2015-01-17T14:24:56Z

balanced budget amendment - bad idea

Woozle: budget crisis navbox

2014-12-26T20:34:24Z

budget crisis navbox

Woozle: merging link from related page

2014-12-26T20:31:16Z

merging link from related page

Woozle: Woozle moved page Myths/spending under Obama is out of control to Myths/Obama/federal budget: generalizing this

2014-12-26T20:20:30Z

Woozle moved page Myths/spending under Obama is out of control to Myths/Obama/federal budget: generalizing this

Woozle: tweaks; generalizing

2014-12-26T20:19:52Z

tweaks; generalizing

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{nav/budget crisis}}
 ==Myth==
 [[Conservatroll]]s often make the following related claims about the federal budget under the Obama administration:

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{nav/budget crisis}}
 [[Conservatroll]]s often make the following related claims about the federal budget under the Obama administration:
 * spending is out of control
@@ Line 14: / Line 15: @@
 [[File:Usgs chartSp03t.png|right|frame|It's big, but leveling off. Now, if we could just enact some sane budget policies...]]
 Although US spending has arguably been out of control during several recent eras -- most notably the Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney years -- these claims have persisted long after the Obama administration reined the deficit back to levels that, although high, are clearly sustainable.
 Most bizarrely, conservatrolls are level these claims at the president who was charged with ''fixing'' the problem, rather than the past president(s) who ''caused'' it. This clearly demonstrates a willful dismissal of reality, qualifying such claims as [[wingnuttery]].

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 * a federal balanced budget law (which would be a [http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/brookings-now/posts/2014/07/5-reasons-why-a-federal-balanced-budget-amendment-is-a-bad-idea bad idea])
 ==Reality==
 Although US spending has arguably been out of control during several recent eras -- most notably the Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney years -- these claims have persisted long after the Obama administration reined the deficit back to levels that, although high, are clearly sustainable.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 * Obama has been the cause of vast increases in spending
 * [[/70 percent increase|The federal debt has increased by almost 70 percent under Obama]].
 Such claims are almost always being used as justification for one or more of the following:

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 * the deficit is out of control
 * Obama has been the cause of vast increases in spending
 Such claims are almost always being used as justification for one or more of the following:

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:34, 26 December 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	{{nav/budget crisis}}
	[[Conservatroll]]s often make the following related claims about the federal budget under the Obama administration:		[[Conservatroll]]s often make the following related claims about the federal budget under the Obama administration:
	* spending is out of control		* spending is out of control

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:31, 26 December 2014
Line 41:		Line 41:
	* '''2012-05-22''' [https://web.archive.org/web/20140703002143/http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22 Obama spending binge never happened]: "Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s."		* '''2012-05-22''' [https://web.archive.org/web/20140703002143/http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22 Obama spending binge never happened]: "Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s."
	* '''2013-04-29''' [http://thehill.com/policy/finance/296775-treasury-plans-to-pay-off-debt-first-time-since-2007 Treasury to pay down debt for first time since Obama took office]: Obama is clearly not making the situation worse. The article specifically cites "unexpectedly higher receipts of government revenue", which can only be due either to (a) an improved economy, (b) a more responsible taxation policy (paying for what we spend), or (c) both.		* '''2013-04-29''' [http://thehill.com/policy/finance/296775-treasury-plans-to-pay-off-debt-first-time-since-2007 Treasury to pay down debt for first time since Obama took office]: Obama is clearly not making the situation worse. The article specifically cites "unexpectedly higher receipts of government revenue", which can only be due either to (a) an improved economy, (b) a more responsible taxation policy (paying for what we spend), or (c) both.
		+	* '''2014-07-20''' [http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/opinion/Paul-Krugman-An-Imaginary-Budget-and-Debt-Crisis.html?_r=0 An Imaginary Budget and Debt Crisis] by Paul Krugman: "...debt and deficits have faded from the news. And there’s a good reason for that disappearing act: The whole thing turns out to have been a false alarm."

← Older revision	Revision as of 20:20, 26 December 2014
(No difference)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-[[Conservatroll]]s often claim that government spending under President Obama is out of control, or even that Obama has been the cause of vast increases in spending.
+[[Conservatroll]]s often make the following related claims about the federal budget under the Obama administration:
-This claim is almost always being used as justification for:
+Such claims are almost always being used as justification for:
 * cutting spending on existing programs (especially those that help the poor)
-* continuing government subsidies for highly profitable companies and sectors (corporate welfare)
+* continuing government subsidies for highly profitable companies and sectors (corporate welfare) as [[trickle-down economics|necessary for the economy]]
 ==Reality==
 Although US spending has arguably been out of control during several recent eras -- most notably the Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney years -- these claims have persisted long after the Obama administration reined the deficit back to levels that, although high, are clearly sustainable.
@@ Line 13: / Line 16: @@
 ==Debunking==
 In order to understand why current US debt levels are not a cause for alarm, it is necessary to be aware of the following:
-# When trying to determine whether debt is excessive or not, the figure to watch is the ratio of debt to [[issuepedia:gross domestic product|GDP]].
+# When trying to determine whether debt is excessive or not, the figure to watch is the [[wikipedia:Debt-to-GDP ratio|ratio of debt to GDP]].
 # In particular, it is a matter of concern if this ratio is high and increasing. If it is going down, and projected to continue to do so, then it's fair to describe the debt as "under control".
 # Reducing a deficit too quickly can result in long-term economic downturns, making it much harder to reduce over the long run.