Deficits May Alter U.S. Politics and Global Power

In a federal budget filled with mind-boggling statistics, two numbers stand out as particularly stunning, for the way they may change American politics and American power.

The first is the projected deficit in the coming year, nearly 11 percent of the country’s entire economic output. That is not unprecedented: During the Civil War, World War I and World War II, the United States ran soaring deficits, but usually with the expectation that they would come back down once peace was restored and war spending abated.

But the second number, buried deeper in the budget’s projections, is the one that really commands attention: By President Obama’s own optimistic projections, American deficits will not return to what are widely considered sustainable levels over the next 10 years. In fact, in 2019 and 2020 ”” years after Mr. Obama has left the political scene, even if he serves two terms ”” they start rising again sharply, to more than 5 percent of gross domestic product. His budget draws a picture of a nation that like many American homeowners simply cannot get above water.

For Mr. Obama and his successors, the effect of those projections is clear: Unless miraculous growth, or miraculous political compromises, creates some unforeseen change over the next decade, there is virtually no room for new domestic initiatives for Mr. Obama or his successors. Beyond that lies the possibility that the United States could begin to suffer the same disease that has afflicted Japan over the past decade. As debt grew more rapidly than income, that country’s influence around the world eroded.

Read it all.

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Economics, Politics, * International News & Commentary, America/U.S.A., Budget, Economy, Globalization, Politics in General, The National Deficit, The U.S. Government

3 comments on “Deficits May Alter U.S. Politics and Global Power

  1. New Reformation Advocate says:

    Well, duh. This isn’t rocket science. But it is alarming.

    The scandalously irresponsible actions of the Obama Administration will bear fateful, severe consequences for many years to come.

    Lord, have mercy.

    David Handy+

  2. John Wilkins says:

    If only Bush hadn’t put both wars and the prescription entitlement program on the American credit card, and bankers hadn’t made such risky loans, Obama wouldn’t have to.

    Either we start the economy now, or we wait.

    Of course, we do spend more on our military than the entire world does combined. Perhaps spending less might be one way to reduce our deficit. An easy way.

  3. robroy says:

    “…and the prescription entitlement program on the American credit card”

    I was opposed to this expansion of entitlements.

    Now, every other industrial nation negotiates prices with drug companies. It is insanity for the U.S. not to. That the Republicans put that into the original legislation in 2003 is reprehensible. But what was the deal that Obama cut with Pharma right from the get go? No negotiations for drug prices.

    Check out the video from this liberal Democrat organization which objects to this: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385×423213

    In 2003, Republicans were getting 70% of big Pharma money. That percentage has switched to Democrats. And the parties have apparently both switched. Certainly points to the ability to buy Congress.

    “…and bankers hadn’t made such risky loans…”

    It was Barney Frank who resisted reigning in Fannie and Freddie (with the help of the likes of Rahm Emmanuel) despite repeated warnings of the Bush administration.

    “Perhaps spending less might be one way to reduce our deficit. An easy way.”

    Agreed!