Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook 1 Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (2 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   5 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

The Austerity Trap and the Jobs Deficit

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Well Said 1  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H3 5/19/12

The dire threat facing America, according to Mitt Romney and Republicans this week, is debt, not mass unemployment.

We face "a prairie fire of debt," Mitt Romney warned in Iowa. Debt is "a grave threat to freedom," intoned House Speaker John Boehner in Washington, while threatening to hold the country hostage again over raising the debt ceiling in December.

In the Senate, Republicans forced votes on the House Republican budget that would gut Medicaid, cut all of the domestic services of government by one-third, enact deep cuts in food stamps, college grants and loans and more. (Even five Republican senators -- including two in competitive races -- couldn't stomach that).

First Things First

There are only two problems with this. Reducing deficits isn't actually the first priority of Romney or Republicans. And the plans they champion will surely cost jobs, and most likely add to the debt burden.

Before dealing with the "prairie fire" that threatens the nation, Romney and Republicans want to add fuel to the flames. Their first priority is spending more money on the military and collecting less money from the rich and the corporations.

Romney's tax plan would cut revenue by some $4.9 trillion over a decade, less some unspecified loophole closings. Millionaires would pocket an average tax cut of $250,000 and those making $10,000 to $20,000 per year would end up paying an average $174 more in taxes.

If Social Security and Medicare were protected for those near retirement, as Romney sometimes suggests, then the domestic side of government -- everything from the FBI to food safety to Medicaid and food stamps -- would have to be cut by over one half in 10 years. Romney can sell that plan only by denying its effects.

The Austerity Temptation

This Republican extremism tempts Democrats to offer alternative plans for austerity. Because Democrats are prepared to raise taxes on the rich and put a lid on military spending, they can reduce deficits without ending Medicare or eviscerating all government services.

Their position of "shared sacrifice" is much more popular in the polls. Two-thirds of Republicans support a mix of spending cuts and tax hikes to reduce the deficit. And in any "grand bargain," the President can put everything on the table, and expose Republican hypocrisy on deficits and extremism on taxes. Many Democrats relish a face-off on austerity.

The Austerity Trap

But arguing about austerity is a trap -- because what the economy needs is jobs and growth.

The best deficit-reduction program is to put people to work. Americans would prefer to cash paychecks and pay taxes than to collect unemployment insurance and rely on food stamps. When people go back to work, government revenues go up and expenditures go down. No measure will do more to reduce deficits. A full employment economy erases more than a third of the deficit. With a stronger workforce, we could focus on the real source of our long-term debt problem: the soaring costs of our broken health care system.

But when Democrats focus on the austerity debate, they get tongue-tied about jobs.

With the Federal Reserve already keeping interest rates near zero, there are only two major theories about how to generate job growth.

One view is what has infamously become known as the oxymoronic "expansionary austerity." The argument is that if you cut spending, taxes and deficits and roll back regulations, businesses will gain the confidence to invest and hire.

The alternative suggests that business owners don't lack confidence; they lack customers. With mass unemployment, businesses sit on profits; the rich move money elsewhere. So the government must act to put people to work.

Next Page  1  |  2

Robert L. Borosage is the president of the Institute for America's Future and co-director of its sister organization, the Campaign for America's Future. The organizations were launched by 100 prominent Americans to challenge the rightward drift in (more...)

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Whose Side Are You On: The Moral Clarity of Occupy Wall Street

Symbolic Blather: Washington's Congenital Disease

Taking Back The American Dream: Us, Not The Politicians

Was Bernie Madoff the Exception or the Rule?

The end of the middle class?

The Austerity Trap and the Jobs Deficit


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
4 people are discussing this page, with 5 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

You wrote: " Democrats need to lay out a big argum... by R.A. on Saturday, May 19, 2012 at 3:12:59 PM
"Democrats need to lay out a big argument on jobs ... by Adam Heilbrun on Saturday, May 19, 2012 at 5:58:16 PM
The Republicans don't want one, the Democrats thin... by David Chester on Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 4:32:32 AM
For a household when your income drops and becomes... by Philip Pease on Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 9:54:22 AM
Phillip, Your reasoning is almost correct, bu... by David Chester on Sunday, May 20, 2012 at 11:26:17 AM