How Bad Is Our National Debt Problem, Anyway?

Join Our Mailing List

And … Will a Deal Fix It?

By Theodoric Meyer
ProPublica, Dec. 28, 2012, 12:34 p.m.

President Obama will meet with congressional leaders today [1] in another attempt to avert the fiscal cliff — the automatic tax increases and spending cuts set to take effect Jan. 1st unless Congress can strike a deal. The cuts and tax hikes, which total more than $500 billion, are so large and so sudden that many economists fear they would plunge the country back into recession.

As Washington tries to hash out a deal, we’ve taken a step back to break down the numbers behind our deficit — how it grew so big, why it is actually shrinking and whether a deal can bring it under control.

How much are we in debt?

The federal debt is just shy of $16.4 trillion [2] at the moment, which also happens to be the debt limit that Congress set in 2011. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner announced on Wednesday [3] that the nation would hit the limit on Dec. 31. The Treasury can take some “extraordinary measures” to keep paying its bills for a few weeks, but it’ll run out of cash by February or March unless Congress raises the limit again.

And that’s different from the deficit, right?

Yes. The debt is the total amount of the government’s outstanding obligations. The deficit is how much the government is in the red in a given year. In the 2012 fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30, the deficit amounted to $1.1 trillion [4].

That seems like a huge number. How did the deficit get so big?

The 2012 deficit was actually the smallest one since 2008. But it’s still a giant shortfall.

As Binyamin Appelbaum noted in The New York Times [5], the federal government has run a deficit in 45 of the last 50 years. (The exceptions were 1969 and 1998 through 2001.) The financial crisis in 2008, however, caused the deficit to skyrocket, as tax revenues fell because of the slump in incomes and production, and government spending on the stimulus and safety net measures such as unemployment insurance shot up. The deficit for the 2008 fiscal year was $455 billion. In 2009, it surged to more than $1.4 trillion.

Since then, the deficit has been falling, albeit very slowly. The government took in 6.4 percent more in taxes in 2012 than in 2011, as the economy improved a bit and several tax breaks expired. And it spent less on Medicaid, unemployment insurance and the continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What about the total debt? How much of that is President Obama’s fault?

The debt has grown by nearly $6 trillion since Obama took office, from $10.5 trillion to $16.4 trillion.

Figuring out how much of that is due to Obama is tougher. The Washington Post’s Ezra Klein, working with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, calculated in January [6] that the legislation Obama had actually signed — as opposed to factors like the economy — had added about $983 billion to the debt.

Klein has also rounded up several charts [7] that break down exactly what’s caused our debt to grow so large. The biggest single factor has been the weak economy; President George W. Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also fueled the debt buildup, as did President Obama’s stimulus.

Have debt levels ever been this high before?

Yes, proportionally. Economists like talk about a country’s debt in relation to its gross domestic product (a measure of the economy’s total annual output). And instead of using a country’s total outstanding debt to calculate this debt-to-GDP ratio, economists typically use the amount of debt held by the public. (Somewhat confusingly, the federal government holds about $5 trillion in obligations to itself, most of which is money owed to the funds that support Social Security and other programs.)

Using this measurement, our debt was about 67.7 percent of GDP last year. As this chart compiled by Quartz’s Ritchie King shows [8], that’s the highest our debt-to-GDP ratio has been since the 1940s, when the need to finance World War II caused the debt to surge to 112.7 percent of GDP. But the economy grew fast enough after the war that the debt soon became a much smaller percentage of the country’s GDP.

It’s worth noting that a number of other developed countries have higher debt-to-GDP ratios [9] than the U.S. Germany’s public debt is 80.6 percent of GDP, and Canada’s is 87.4 percent. The euro zone’s most troubled countries fare even worse: Italy’s debt is 120.1 percent of GDP; Greece’s is 165.3 percent.

US Capitol

At least we’re not Greece. How much longer can we keep borrowing?

That’s a tough one. Some commentators — including Paul Krugman, the Nobel-winning economist and columnist for The New York Times — have argued that our current deficits are mostly a product of the sluggish economy. The deficit, Krugman wrote last week [10], “is a side-effect of an economic depression, and the first order of business should be to end that depression — which means, among other things, leaving the deficit alone for now.”

Other economists — including Carmen Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff, who studied eight centuries’ worth of financial crises for their book “This Time Is Different” — argue that countries with debt-to-GDP ratios above a certain level tend to experience slower economic growth. Reinhart and Rogoff suggest the level is around 90 percent of GDP [11] — which the U.S. is rapidly approaching. A recent Congressional Research Service report [12] concluded that while the debt-to-GDP ratio can’t keep rising forever, “it can rise for a time.” The report continued:

It is hard to predict at what point bond holders would deem it to be unsustainable. A few other advanced economies have debt-to-GDP ratios higher than that of the United States. Some of those countries in Europe have recently seen their financing costs rise to the point that they are unable to finance their deficits solely through private markets. But Japan has the highest debt-to-GDP ratio of any advanced economy, and it has continued to be able to finance its debt at extremely low costs.

How does all this fit into the fiscal cliff?  Would a deal to avert it fix our debt problem?

Actually, going over the fiscal cliff would almost singlehandedly erase the deficit. Tax rates would shoot up, and the fiscal cliff’s indiscriminate budget cuts would slash military and safety-net spending alike.

The problem is that all those tax increases and spending cuts would likely throw the economy back into a recession, causing the deficit to balloon again. “The economy will, I think, go off a cliff,” said Ben Bernanke [13], the Federal Reserve chairman.

(For more detail, see The Washington Post’s exhaustive fiscal cliff explainer [14].)

What the two sides are trying to do is identify cuts that are ultimately deep enough to bring down the deficit — and thus, eventually, the debt — without stalling the economy. But negotiations collapsed last week [15] after John Boehner, the Republican House speaker, tried and failed to pass a “Plan B” alternative to the president’s proposal in the House. Obama is set to meet with congressional leaders today to try to strike a deal to block at least some of the cliff’s impact by Monday night. But its prospects seem dim.

“I have to be very honest,” Sen. Harry Reid, the majority leader, said on Thursday. “I don’t know timewise how it can happen now.”

Assessment

Of course, some analysts have pointed out that people on both the Republican and the Democratic sides may actually want to move the cliff just slightly down the road into the next Congress, which convenes Thursday, Jan. 3. The advantages: Boehner can be safely re-elected as Speaker before he has to do serious twisting of arms of fellow GOP House members to get their votes for any compromise plan. And there will be a few more Democrats in the House and the Senate for the White House to rely on in enlisting the votes it needs to ratify any such deal. The disadvantage: Delay makes the risk of miscalculation greater for either or both sides — and for the public.

Link: http://www.propublica.org/article/how-bad-is-our-debt-problem-anyway-and-will-a-deal-fix-it

Conclusion

Your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Speaker: If you need a moderator or speaker for an upcoming event, Dr. David E. Marcinko; MBA – Publisher-in-Chief of the Medical Executive-Post – is available for seminar or speaking engagements. Contact: MarcinkoAdvisors@msn.com

OUR OTHER PRINT BOOKS AND RELATED INFORMATION SOURCES:

DICTIONARIES: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko
PHYSICIANS: www.MedicalBusinessAdvisors.com
PRACTICES: www.BusinessofMedicalPractice.com
HOSPITALS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466558731
CLINICS: http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781439879900
BLOG: www.MedicalExecutivePost.com
FINANCE: Financial Planning for Physicians and Advisors
INSURANCE: Risk Management and Insurance Strategies for Physicians and Advisors

 

Product Details  Product Details

Product Details

 

US Budget Deficits Require Both Spending Cuts and Tax Increases

The CRFB Speaks

By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation

Join Our Mailing List 

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) has published a release on October 20 that discusses some of the options to tackle the federal deficit. According to a Bloomberg News poll, there are two major issues that are foremost in the minds of voters as they go to the polls on November 2nd. The first is jobs and the US economy. The second issue focuses on federal finances and the budget deficit.

CFRB Suggestions

The CFRB suggests that there are four potential options for reducing expenditures and one for increasing revenue.

1. Fraud, Waste and Abuse – A favorite comment of all political candidates is that he or she will reduce fraud, waste and abuse. While there may be some savings, this historically has been a fairly modest part of actual deficit reduction.

2. Strengthen Social Security – Congress will need to address methods for strengthening Social Security. The Social Security program used to run a substantial surplus each year. However, in 2010 the federal deficit will total approximately $40 billion. That is, the amounts received by Social Security will be $40 billion lower than the amounts distributed for benefits.

Social Security

By 2020, Social Security could be running a $100 billion deficit. Social Security Trustees have stated, “The projected trust fund shortfalls should be addressed in a timely way so that necessary changes can be phased in gradually and workers can be given time to plan for them.”

3. Healthcare – The Congressional Budget Office notes that the current healthcare programs could require nearly one-half of the federal budget by 2030 or 2040. Therefore, there will need to be further changes in healthcare in order to make the program fiscally sustainable.

4. Defense – Defense expenditures in 2010 were 4.7% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). This amounted to $692 billion. Defense Secretary Gates has acknowledged that there may be opportunities to eliminate some weapons systems and reduce expenditures.

5. Increased Taxes – The CFRB release states, “It is very difficult to lay out a credible deficit plan that would not increase taxes. It is also very difficult to develop a comprehensive plan that would not raise taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year.” The potential for increased taxes has focused on income taxes, capital gains taxes, estate taxes and a consumption tax such as a gas tax or a value added tax.

Assessment

The Fiscal Commission appointed by President Obama is expected to issue a report in December that discusses these issues.

Editor’s Note: Your editor and this organization take no position with respect to the many financial and tax options that are available to Congress. This information is offered as a public service to our readers.

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. How does this state of affairs affect the healthcare industrial complex? Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product Details  Product Details

On the US Budget Deficit in 2010

Now North of $1.3 Trillion Dollars

By Children’s Home Society of Florida Foundation

Join Our Mailing List 

The federal fiscal year for 2010 concluded on September 30th. The Office of Management and Budget and Department of Treasury have released the official figures for fiscal year 2010. The deficit was $1.294 trillion.

Geithner Speaks

Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner noted that the cost of the financial rescue of banks and automotive companies was lower than expected. He stated, “By carefully managing the emergency initiatives to stop the financial panic and by accelerating our exit from those investments, we have significantly lowered the cost to taxpayers, bringing the costs of the financial rescue down by more than $240 billion this year.”

TARP

The Troubled Asset Recovery Program (TARP) cost to Treasury was $9 billion in 2010. During this year, the Federal Government also spent $52.6 billion to support the housing industry through troubled lenders Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

Deficit Concerns

The deficit declined slightly from 10% in 2009 to 8.9% of the 2010 gross domestic product (GDP). Tax receipts for 2010 were $2.16 trillion or 14.9% of the economy. Government expenditures were $3.45 trillion or 23.8% of the economy. Senate Budget Committee Ranking Minority Member Judd Gregg (R-NH) expressed concern about this deficit and noted, “These abrupt and shocking changes in our fiscal situation cannot be dismissed as “inherited” problems when the tally of the majority’s spending spree has climbed into the trillions.”

Assessment

The Fiscal Commission appointed by President Barack Obama is developing a plan to reduce the deficit. The target for the Fiscal Commission is to reduce the current 8.9% GDP deficit down to 3% of GDP within five years.

Editor’s Note: Your editor and this organization take no position with respect to the many financial and tax options that are available to Congress. This information is offered as a public service to our readers.
Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. How does this state of affairs affect the healthcare industrial complex? Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, subscribe to the ME-P. It is fast, free and secure.

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Health Dictionary Series: http://www.springerpub.com/Search/marcinko 

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/product/9780826105752

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

Product Details  Product Details

Will Fiscal Commission Consider a VAT to Reduce the Federal Deficit?

Moro on the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform

By Robert Giese
bob.giese@chsfl.org

The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform [NCFRR] continues to develop a comprehensive proposal to address the federal deficit. It has invited comments from members of Congress, leaders of all types of American organizations and private individuals.

We invite ME-P contributions, as well.

A Four- Point Proposal

James Q. Riordan, Sr. sent a letter this week to co-chair Alan K. Simpson, the former Senator from Wyoming. Mr. Riordan made four basic points about the fiscal problems and suggested a Value Added Tax (VAT) as a solution.

[picapp align=”none” wrap=”false” link=”term=National+Commission+on+Fiscal+Responsibility+and+R&iid=8643885″ src=”8/6/7/2/Obama_Speaks_On_32c4.jpg?adImageId=13115540&imageId=8643885″ width=”380″ height=”536″ /]

First, he indicated that there is too much “unaffordable spending.” Even with limited spending growth, the income tax cannot be sufficiently increased to pay for current and future proposed spending without doing damage to the economy and increasing unemploymen.

Second, Riordan claims that the only potential solution is a VAT. However, because the VAT is a tax on consumption and would have great impact on middle and lower incomes, it needs to be accompanied by a progressive income tax.

His third point is that the new income tax would need to be very simple. In his view, there would be no deductions for home mortgage interest, charitable gifts or medical expenses.

Fourth, he would tax all income only once. There would presumably not be a corporate-level tax or an estate tax under this theory.

Inadequate Staff Resources

As the fiscal commission considers the options for reducing spending and increasing taxes, it has indicated that the current staff resources are inadequate. In response to a request by the commission, Senate Majority Reid sent a letter this week to the White House and requested additional staff support. The White House indicated that it will be pleased to “work with him” to provide additional assistance.

At a hearing on the financial challenges, Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) noted that the commission is under great pressure to develop an effective plan. He stated, “If we don’t get something out of that commission, we are over the cliff.”

Assessment

Senate Budget Committee Chair Kent Conrad (D-ND) was the prime supporter of the commission. He stated, “This is not a time to impose austerity in my judgment.” However, he indicated that austerity will be necessary in the future, and that budget cuts and tax increases “must be imposed in a way that is convincing.”

Editors Note: For now, we take no specific position on VAT or other tax and spending recommendations by the Fiscal Commission. This information is offered because potential Fiscal Commission plans may affect many of our ME-P physician readers, subscribers, consultants and advisors.

Join Our Mailing List

Conclusion

And so, your thoughts and comments on this ME-P are appreciated. Feel free to review our top-left column, and top-right sidebar materials, links, URLs and related websites, too. Then, be sure to subscribe. It is fast, free and secure.

Get our Widget: Get this widget!

Our Other Print Books and Related Information Sources:

Practice Management: http://www.springerpub.com/prod.aspx?prod_id=23759

Physician Financial Planning: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/0763745790

Medical Risk Management: http://www.jbpub.com/catalog/9780763733421

Healthcare Organizations: www.HealthcareFinancials.com

Health Administration Terms: www.HealthDictionarySeries.com

Physician Advisors: www.CertifiedMedicalPlanner.com

Subscribe Now: Did you like this Medical Executive-Post, or find it helpful, interesting and informative? Want to get the latest ME-Ps delivered to your email box each morning? Just subscribe using the link below. You can unsubscribe at any time. Security is assured.

Link: http://feeds.feedburner.com/HealthcareFinancialsthePostForcxos

Sponsors Welcomed: And, credible sponsors and like-minded advertisers are always welcomed.

Link: https://healthcarefinancials.wordpress.com/2007/11/11/advertise

A Healthcare Reform Budget Deficit Opinion Poll

Deficit Neutral, or Not [You Decide]

By Ann Miller; RN, MHA

[Executive Director]

President Barack H. Obama just promised not to sign any health reform legislation that increases the federal deficit. This promise recognizes the rising public concern about a fiscal trend that, if left unchecked, could leave us with $19 Trillion Dollars in federal debt within a decade.

Of course, without the pledge, given the current dismal economic climate, health reform would be dead-in-the-water.  

QUESTION: And so, is healthcare reform really deficit neutral?

Please VOTE: