Debt, debt, debt…
It seems debt is all the rage in Washington these days, and with good reason. The federal government only stays open on debt, and unless Congress and the President can agree soon, we’ll hit that limit and…well, who knows what will happen next.
Originally, negotiators were looking at a deal to cut deficits by about $2.5 trillion over 10 years.
But as the deadline approaches, Obama has raised the stakes. The goal he is now pushing for — as much as $4.5 trillion in deficit cuts over the coming decade — would require changes both in taxes and in the government’s basic safety-net programs.
“There’s going to be pain involved politically on all sides,” Obama told reporters after the White House meeting. Continue reading
Posted in Fiscal Reform
Tagged Barack Obama, budget talks, Charles Krauthammer, Congressional Budget Office, Debt, deficit, Ed Morrissey, Federal government of the United States, fiscal reform, spending problem, structural imbalance, United States Congress, war on terror, White House
So what is this structural imbalance? : Vox Populi.
Structural balance refers to the matching of ongoing expenditures with ongoing revenues. If revenues equal or exceed expenditures, structural balance is achieved. If expenditures exceed revenues, structural imbalance occurs.
Before the Great Recession, Utah achieved structural balance. The fiscal 2006 surpluses were $241 million. For fiscal year 2007 that ended last June, surpluses were $308 million in the two main tax funds, the General Fund and the Education Fund.
In 2011 state revenues do not equal or exceed expenditures. In fact, the state is an estimated $313 million dollars short of achieving structural balance and that does not include the high growth areas of the budget such as Medicaid, public & higher education.
Now you know what “structural balance” is. Utah’s working towards it, and California may never have it.
What’s it take to get it? Cut services or raise taxes. Wanna guess which is easier to do?