GayPatriot

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://www.gaypatriot.net/2013/01/16/austerity-doesnt-work/trackback/

  1. Maybe austerity doesn’t work, but profligacy is unsustainable.

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 2:55 pm - January 16, 2013

  2. Let me revise: Austerity may be painful, but profligacy is unsustainable.

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 2:59 pm - January 16, 2013

  3. A bit of color on the tax hikes yielding less revenue than expected. In Spain, for example:

    [Last year's] tax increases — on income, savings, property, companies, sales, tobacco and fuel — added 7 billion euros of revenue through November, according to the tax agency. The government estimate was for 20 billion euros.

    Oops.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 16, 2013 @ 3:14 pm - January 16, 2013

  4. Within the USA, The governors of Louisiana and Nebraska have proposed ending their state income taxes; like Florida, Tennessee, Texas and Wyoming.

    Meanwhile, Massachusetts, Maryland, California, New York, and Illinois have enacted massive increases.

    Wonder which set of states will see better economic growth. (Actually, I don’t).

    Comment by V the K — January 16, 2013 @ 3:45 pm - January 16, 2013

  5. I think Austerity is the only choice given that at some point there isn’t going to be enough money to continue at current levels.

    I do think how cuts are made is important, but better to cut now than end up in too deep a crisis for cuts to do any good later.

    Comment by Just Me — January 16, 2013 @ 6:22 pm - January 16, 2013

  6. Agree.

    On re-reading this post, the point could be less clear than I thought. If someone has never read me before, they might wonder where I’m going. I think large spending cuts are a necessity, and I just wish Europe would try them. Contrary to left-wing propaganda, Europe hasn’t tried them yet. (They might this year, 2013.) But they have tried tax hikes. Tax hikes + no net spending cut is the wrong path; the reason their economies are so sluggish. And our economy too, since Obama is determined to drag us along the same path.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 17, 2013 @ 3:55 am - January 17, 2013

  7. Austerity by itself won’t work. Just cutting spending won’t change the tax or regulatory burden on society and businesses. The net effect would be to reduce borrowing by the Government but that alone won’t significantly change the dynamics in the economy.

    Austerity will only work if Government starts to transfer control of the economy back to businesses and individuals. That means reducing the regulatory burden and costs so that businesses can invest and individuals can feel more secure about their future. When that happens the economy will start to grow again.

    Austerity in this context should really be defined as Government living within its means and not trying to do those things that are better left to businesses and individuals.

    Comment by David — January 17, 2013 @ 8:12 am - January 17, 2013

  8. Austerity hasn´t worked in Europe because leftist governments caved in to the people or better yet to the unions. Sarkozy in France raised the retirement age to 62, and the unions voted him out and socialist Hollande in, who immediately dropped it back to 60 and to pay for it raised the top tax rate to 75%. French unions give the impression the french are lazy, who would rather retire at 60 with a pension rather than work to more years for more money in their pockets. C´est le vie!

    Freebies work. Romney´s 47% comment was right on. Look at Venezuela, between the military and government employees they constitute 50% of the population and with the give aways to the poor, Chavez didn´t need to resort to fraud to win elections. Barak Obama read his book.

    Comment by Roberto — January 17, 2013 @ 1:11 pm - January 17, 2013

  9. “Have European countries actually cut their spending?”

    [Two Thoughts]
    1. “The real question addressed by this post is how bad spending cuts have been …. It is fine to argue “due to automatic stabilizers, spending should have increased more than it did.”

    That is not how people phrase it, rather they are complaining rather vociferously about “spending cuts,” many of which are either imaginary or extremely small.” [Fair point]

    2. E.g., UK “Each year increases; no cut”: [but]
    2009-10: 47.7% of GDP
    2010-11: 46.7% of GDP
    2011-12: 45.2% of GDP

    Comment by Passing By — January 17, 2013 @ 2:30 pm - January 17, 2013

  10. And the ignorance of Cas/Passing By continues to amuse, with its screaming insistence that a reduction in the rate of increase constitutes a cut in spending, and its attempt to argue that government making up a lower percentage of GDP means automatically that government is spending less.

    These are the mental gymnastics that the psychotic Keynesian left keeps trying to deploy, all of which center on one point and one point alone: lazy worthless Passing By/Cas wants to sit on its couch all day and be paid the same as those who work and create value, and government is the means by which it intends to do that.

    It just has to create the rationalization to do it.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 17, 2013 @ 4:47 pm - January 17, 2013

  11. Agree that in the 2008-2012 period, the UK, France and Germany slowed their growth in spending. And they even slowed it below their nominal GDP growth rate (which, in turn, is some combination of inflation + real growth, depending on the country), hence the declining share.

    But NDT is right that slowing your growth in spending is still a net spending increase (not a cut). And it certainly isn’t the type of draconian cut that the Left has been protesting; not unless you care to admit that inflation is a larger factor than you have previously admitted.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 17, 2013 @ 5:16 pm - January 17, 2013

  12. “These are the mental gymnastics that the psychotic [Libertarian right] keeps trying to deploy, all of which center on one point and one point alone: lazy worthless [North Dallas Thirty/Thelma] wants to sit on its couch all day …”

    Comment by Passing By — January 17, 2013 @ 6:18 pm - January 17, 2013

  13. “But NDT is right that slowing your growth in spending is still not a net spending cut.” [Not the point I raised]

    “It is fine to argue “due to automatic stabilizers, spending should have increased more than it did.” That is not how people phrase it, rather they are complaining rather vociferously about “spending cuts,” many of which are either imaginary or extremely small.” [Fair point] “

    Comment by Passing By — January 17, 2013 @ 6:21 pm - January 17, 2013

  14. Try stating your point directly, PB. (Your own words.)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — January 17, 2013 @ 7:09 pm - January 17, 2013

  15. lazy worthless [North Dallas Thirty/Thelma] wants to sit on its couch all day …”

    Comment by Passing By — January 17, 2013 @ 6:18 pm – January 17, 2013

    Except, given that ILC and Dan both know me, what that makes obvious is that you’re just a desperate liar.

    There goes your credibility. LOL.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — January 17, 2013 @ 9:02 pm - January 17, 2013

  16. “ILC and Dan both know me” [It doesn't make you a desperate bad person, North Dallas Thirty, just because you like sitting on your couch ...]

    Comment by Passing By — January 18, 2013 @ 1:23 am - January 18, 2013

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

**Note: Your first comment is held for moderation. Avoid profanity, avoid personal attacks on fellow commenters, and avoid complaining about personal attacks (even on you). Feel free to disagree with anyone, but focus on their ideas; give us the information that you think they overlooked.**


Live preview of comment

Close this window.

0.270 Powered by Wordpress