« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

CBO’s Budget Report: Perennial Debt for Generations

The legacy of dependency: A baseline of indebtedness and stagnation

“The rosy predictions for revenues and reduced healthcare spending can come to fruition, but not with the current socialist policies as the baseline.”

The budget season has officially commenced today with CBO’s release of its annual budget and economic outlook.  Here are some of the major takeaways from the report:

FY 2012 Budget

The topline figure that the media will focus on is the projected $1.070 trillion budget deficit for FY 2012, down from $1.3 trillion last year.  However, as CBO notes several times throughout the report, the reduction in this year’s deficit is predicated on several assumptions.

1)      Revenues:  The entirety of this year’s deficit reduction comes from higher projected revenues, roughly $220 billion.  CBO is forced to score current law, which assumes that the payroll tax cut will expire at the end of February.  Another 10-month extension, which is almost a forgone conclusion, would cost over $100 billion.  Also, the CBO baseline does not include a likely AMT patch, and extension of many annual “tax extenders,” such as the credit for research and development.  It’s very likely that the extensions will wipe out the entire revenue gain from this year over 2011, thereby eliminating the reduction in the deficit.

2)      Outlays:  CBO is projecting $3.601 trillion in spending, up just $3 billion from last year.  Obviously, this projection does not account for a full-year extension of unemployment benefits and doc fix, which could add as much as $70 billion to this year’s spending total.

3)      Defense:  Outlays for defense will be reduced by another $20 billion.

When these factors are accounted for, it is clear that non-defense discretionary spending will not decrease significantly, while mandatory spending will continue to rise.  If you assume the alternative scenario, in which most of the temporary tax and spending measures are extended, the deficit should be about the same as last year; around $1.3 trillion.  In other words, there will be slightly more revenue this year, but increased spending as well.

10-Year Budget Frame: 2013-2022:

Over the next 10 years, CBO is projecting $41.179 trillion in revenues and $44.251 trillion in spending, for a deficit of $3.072 trillion.  The $3 trillion figure is a real lowball estimate of our projected debt for several reasons.  Under that scenario, our annual deficits would dip to $450 billion in just two years, and stay below $400 billion indefinitely.  They are assuming rosy pictures of revenue increases, along with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.  Furthermore, CBO notes, that Medicare and Medicaid spending have always increased above expectations, and with Obamacare taking effect, the real cost of healthcare spending will blow out the budget deficits – way beyond $3 trillion.

Another important long-term factor is interest on the debt.  At present, interest rates are at historic lows, but they will eventually revert back to their historic norms.  That could add several trillion more to the 10-year deficit.

The rosy predictions for revenues and reduced healthcare spending can come to fruition, but not with the current socialist policies as the baseline.

Economic Outlook

CBO is projecting more stagnation for the next few years.  For 2012, they are seeing 2% GDP growth and 8.9% unemployment.  For 2013, they are projecting a pullback to just 1.1% growth and a spike in unemployment to 9.2%.  With these bleak economic figures, it’s hard to envision a scenario in which revenues increase substantially and spending on welfare programs decline (as projected by the report).  How can revenues go from 16% of GDP to 20% in just two years, even without the extension of tax cut provisions?  Then again, it’s all a moot point.  Budget deficits tend to be much higher than the figures projected in CBO reports, in part, due to some of the aforementioned factors.

Debt

Using the unlikely “current policy baseline,” gross federal debt would rise to $21.7 trillion under CBO’s projections.  In the more likely “alternative fiscal scenario” gross federal debt rises to $29.4 trillion by 2022, 120% of GDP.  The public share of the debt would reach $23.2 trillion, or 94% of GDP.  Again, the GDP numbers, under current policies, are overly optimistic.

Social Security

Social Security is, by far, the largest expenditure for the foreseeable future.  This year, SS outlays will top $770 billion, accounting for 21.3% of the entire federal budget for FY 2012.  From 2013-2022, SS spending will top $10.5 trillion, almost 24% of the budget.  On the revenue side, Social Security taxes will only rise $627 billion this year and $8.9 trillion over 10 years.  Once again, this projection does not factor in any future payroll tax cuts.

Another noteworthy point is that the Social Security Disability Insurance trust fund will be exhausted in 2016.

Remember that the Social Security Trust Fund is a notional accounting gimmick and is nonexistent.  Consequently, every penny of SS benefits that is not covered from the payroll tax will augment our deficit.  The real question is why one quarter of the budget is consumed by a program that should be controlled by the individual.  Why are we bankrupting our future for a program that offers a worse rate of return than private accounts, which would not cost the government and future generations of Americans a penny?

Medicare

Gross Medicare spending, the second largest domestic spending program, will reach $560 billion this year and $7.8 trillion over 10 years.  Net Medicare spending (subtracting $1.2 trillion in offsetting revenues from premium payments from seniors) will be about $6.55 trillion.   This year’s outlays would have been higher if not for a shift in certain payments from fiscal year 2012 into fiscal year 2011 because the first scheduled date for payments to health plans in 2012 fell on a weekend.  Revenues from the Medicare payroll tax will only bring in roughly $2.8 trillion – and that is including the payroll tax increases under Obamacare.  As such, the Medicare hospital insurance trust fund, which is funded by payroll taxes, will be exhausted in 2022.

Now that it is incontrovertibly clear that government has failed at controlling healthcare and retirement costs, is it too much to ask that we allow personal ownership and the free-market to get a bite at the apple?

Liberals always complain that seniors will be left to their own devices under our policies.  Judging by the future debt figures, I think we would all rather be on our own, as opposed to shouldering the burden of crushing debt payments.

Cross-posted to The Madison Project

COMMENTS

  • skorrent1

    Projected spending $44T, revenue $41T, right? (Not that it’s particularly significant, anyway.)

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    how we get to private accounts quickly without cutting benefits to the boomers, I just cannot get excited about the idea. The time for those private accounts was with the Greenspan Commission and it may essentially be too late now (unless we want to raise taxes to cover the transition).

    I think the CBO is way too high on unemployment rates for the next two years and this could impact their revenue projections. I actually think we can get under 8% by the end of the year and possibly to 7.5 in 2013.

    Finally, I would trade the expiration of the Bush tax cuts (all of them) for a permanent reform of medicare/medicaid/long term social security in a heartbeat. Taxes can always be cut again, but the window to reform these programs and fix our debt issue are limited.

    • aesthete

      Taxes have been cut several times over the past 25 years. Entitlements? Not so much.

      For that matter, the same applies to military spending.

    • skorrent1

      This year will probably be focussed on dumping millions more off the “looking for work” rolls. This won’t do much for increasing revenue.

      What would a “permanent reform” to M/M/SS look like if not private accounts? You want more “final solutions” like the tax/age tweaks of ’86? I hear the can bouncing down the road.

      • Death_of_the_Donkey

        1. I do not believe that the BLS fudges any numbers with regards to payrolls. One, they are professional statisticians and economists, not political appointees. Two, the data and methodologies are public and widely read. Three, this would be the biggest conspiracy ever pulled off.

        2. I think private accounts would be desirable, the problem is getting there. You cannot get there in any reasonably amount of time while also allowing the boomers the full fare that was promised them and/or raising payroll taxes significantly.

  • melbedewy

    How do I answer taunts from leftist friends, family and co-workers about there being no significant inflation despite 8 trillion dollars in squandered money over the last 5 years?
    My answer has been that it will come, but that is ringing rather flat.

    • civildebate

      All the evidence available says you’re wrong. Are you just going to stare it all in the face and persist?

      Japan is at 225% debt to GDP and they’re still trying to fight of deflation.

      The bond market sure as hell doesn’t think we’re going to go broke.

      The debt limit just went up and there were no downgrades or worries at all from the markets.

      People should take a look at Modern Monetary Theory. Countries with fiat currencies, floating exchange rates, control over their own currency, and all their debt in their own currency can not ever be insolvent. That’s why Greece is having problems (Germany controls the Euro so they don’t have their own currency) but countries with equal or worse debt issues are just fine (USA, Japan etc.).

    • carolina

      because folks can’t/won’t borrow because they don’t see economic growth. We need FISCAL (tax) changes to get the economy moving again. The Federal Reserve cannot do any more than what they have done. Monetary policy and fiscal policy have to work together. I, personally, believe that the weaker $ has hurt the economy. I know the BO policies have hurt the economy.
      As long as we continue to go through deleveraging there will not be enough $ velocity or credit expansion to get all of the excess money into the system – and inflation will remain low. People have to see that an investment (in a business) will bring profits. Fiscal policy needs to help the PRODUCERS in order to get economic growth. BO’s Keynesian ‘stimulus’ has hurt the economy because a larger debt is seen as future tax hikes. The govt is CROWDING OUT THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

  • davidengageamerica

    At the report briefing, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf said that the longer Congress waits to determine the best course of action, the worse off the economy gets. Elmendorf also said that huge increases in taxes or deep spending cuts would severely hamper economic growth in the near future.

    The best policy Congress could choose to implement would be the Bowles-Simpson deficit reduction plan. Not only would the plan both raise revenue and cut spending, but it would also simplify the tax code, improve fairness, increase U.S. competitiveness abroad, and spur economic growth. http://bit.ly/noTDPF