"Profligacy" - I Don't Think That Word Means What Obama Thinks It Means

Keith Hennessey evaluates Obama's claim that the last decade was one of relative profligacy.

And let me add this - deficits are not a measure of governmental restraint or prudence.  Spending as a percentage of GDP is a better guide to the Federal presence in the economy, and that will be going up under Obama's proposed budgets.

Put another way, I would be more concerned with a government that had expenditures and tax receipts balanced at 25% of GDP then I would be a government that had expenditures of 20% of GDP, tax receipts of 17% of GDP, and borrowed to finance the rest.

Comments

[Jane]

There's no excuse for leaving Brown hanging so long, except for the possibility that health care could somehow get rammed through in the meantime.

Ex, My theory is that it was a mutual decision. They voted on the increase in debt ceiling last week - it passed 60-40. My guess is republicans wanted it to pass but be on record in opposition. Otherwise they would have been screaming for Brown.

I do think Kirk by law had no right to vote on anything since the 19th.

[PD]

faster car

Good to know we're making progress.

[boris]

"can't find anything suggesting that this scheme would be mandatory"

Well dropping your private health insurance coverage for the public option wasn't going to be mandatory either. Just inevitable.

[Melinda Romanoff]

DoT-

It's the only way for them to get it done. No vote, just your assets are gone. And for good measure, they leave out the market implications, because, in their minds, there are none when they blow out the holdings for the cash.

No problems there, either.

Oh, anybody notice that Geithner and Volcker were NOT under oath today. It was blocked by the Chair, because Bunning tried.

Skittles and Unicorns...

[hit and run]

BTW...

Graham Nash enjoyed his birthday greetings.

Thanks JiB.

[Rob Crawford]

MR, on a cursory glance I can't find anything suggesting that this scheme would be mandatory--it looks like they contemplate giving people an option to convert to a very bad investment.

Betcha the only other option would be complete loss of your assets. We're not people to the "Educated Classes"; we're livestock. If you keep that in mind, their actions and plans make complete sense.

(For example, Sunstein's idea of using Mobys to drive public debate. That's a sign that he doesn't think us worthy of engaging intellectually, but rather thinks in terms of herding animals.)