Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Fiscal irresponsibility in one graph

change_in_federal_deficit,_2009-2017.png

By Ezra Klein  |  July 14, 2010; 12:13 PM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Research desk is open
Next: The failure of conservative elites

Comments

hate to do this to you, dylan and greg sargent, but i'm putting a block on washingtonpost.com on my comp and delisting your RSS feeds. roger cohen's column in defense of child rape was a bridge too far.

Posted by: masterlevitt | July 14, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

Ezra,

Broader point taken, but note that UI extensions are expected to reduce 'revenue'. Doesn't this suggest that UI extensions aren't really all that effective in terms of economic stimulus?

Posted by: justin84 | July 14, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

Yes, I also want to know how UI benefits reduce revenues. I would think it would only increase expenses (and theoretically raise revenues because UI benefits count as income and are taxed)

I think it is incredibly unlikely that ~$400B in tax cuts will generate $1.2 trillion in economic activity taxed at 33%, so thank you for this chart.

Posted by: will12 | July 14, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

The public debate regarding monetary expansion versus austerity measures is well underway in the public domain -- but what about the default option? More at:

http://wjmc.blogspot.com/2010/07/what-about-default-option.html

I am seeking audience feedback regarding the costs of a default versus the intrinsic advantage of walking away from $13 trillion in existing debt, thank you in advance...

Posted by: mckibbinusa | July 14, 2010 1:22 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company