I solved the deficit!

[angus]

And so can you, with NYTimes.com's interactive feature (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html).

That's very instructive. In particular, I managed to balance it out until 2030 without cutting any welfare program (you know, those that "absolutely need to be cut"...), almost only by taxing the rich and cutting military spending. Here's my proposal.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=d3x006qv

Of course, that's not going to happen...

Nor should it.  It's a cute toy, and it sells ad space, but solving the deficit needs to be done not with across-the-board spending cuts, but with some forethought.  Any child with a computer can say hey, let's do a ten percent on this program and a 30 percent on that.  If it makes you feel better, pat yourself on the back.  The NYT actually sells ads with these gimmicks.  What's your excuse?

[angus]

And so can you, with NYTimes.com's interactive feature (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html).

That's very instructive. In particular, I managed to balance it out until 2030 without cutting any welfare program (you know, those that "absolutely need to be cut"...), almost only by taxing the rich and cutting military spending. Here's my proposal.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html?choices=d3x006qv

Of course, that's not going to happen...

Nor should it.  It's a cute toy, and it sells ad space, but solving the deficit needs to be done not with across-the-board spending cuts, but with some forethought.  Any child with a computer can say hey, let's do a ten percent on this program and a 30 percent on that.  If it makes you feel better, pat yourself on the back.  The NYT actually sells ads with these gimmicks.  What's your excuse?

If you bothered clicking on the link...

...pat yourself on the back.

I actually bothered clicking the link.

I stopped patting myself on the back long ago.

I'm aware of these little gimmicks.  In fact, it isn't the first time a thread was created with exactly this sort of tool.  Several years ago, and I think that one was also from NYT, a similar user-friendly "solve the deficit yourself" feature appeared.  (Maybe that's the two year old data muon was referring to.)

I just don't think it's as simple as "take 30 percent off the military budget..." etc.

Yes, we probably ought to take 30 percent off the military budget, but it's exactly that sort of thinking--the kind that gives us responses like "how the hell do I know what the bill says?  I didn't read it!" from legislators--that get us into such messes in the first place.

These guys make far more money than I.  Maybe even more than you.  I don't think it's asking to much to have them go line-by-line and decide what is important and what isn't.  What the NYT is doing is selling papers.  Well, selling ad space on line, as it amounts to these days.  It's a catchy gimmick, but I sincerely hope this isn't what congress is doing when it comes time for austerity measures.

[angus]

Angus, I don't think anyone, including the Times, is claiming that the process is this simple or that it should be.  I think it's a tool meant to give people a general idea of what the U.S.'s budget is like, something virtually no one has any decent understanding of.

I think you're right that the NYT is trying to give a general idea.  I also think you're right that folks have no decent understanding about it.  I include a good many of the Honorable Gentlemen and Honorable Gentlewomen gracing the halls of the US capitol building when I mention these "folks."  But it makes me feel better to imagine that they do. 

[angus]

When the Dems start copping to admitting that entitlements need to be cut back, get back to me. So far, it is all about raising rates on the rich by 4.6% ("solving" 8% of the deficit hole), and embracing the Bush tax cuts for everyone else until the supernova. It is all a joke really. D.C. must think we are all dumbs.

I was listening to an interview with the Tennessee senator, Corker, tonight on the public radio station on the way home.  Yeah, yeah, I know, NPR is bad for your head.  "The world is a terrible place, and there's nothing you can do about it..."  All reasoned in a soothing voice till you believe it.  Still, it's noise for the journey.  Anyway, Corker was saying some pretty smart things.  Yes, he's willing to raise taxes to pre-2001 levels for folks making 250K or more, and maybe a little for the 100K+ crowd, but he also wants some considerations on the entitlements.  Specifically, he was talking about scaling back automatic increments for Social Security and raising the ages for partial, half, and full benefits.  It's a start.