Deficit calculator & Geithner's rosy debt projections

Look, Mom, I reduced the United States's national debt in 2020 to 37% of GDP using CEPR's Deficit Calculator!

This calculator allows users to pick various items and see how they'll shrink (or grow) the debt by 2020.

37% of one year's GDP may sound like a lot but it's actually a pittance, especially for an economy as big as the USA's. The Center for Economic and Policy Research estimates that if we continue on our present course, America's debt-to-GDP ratio will be 85% by 2020. That may be too optimistic.

A report by the Department of the Treasury estimated that by 2015 the net public debt will rise to $19.6 trillion. But as Zero Hedge's trenchant Tyler Durden explains, TreasSec Geithner's projection was based on unrealistically robust estimates of U.S. economic growth at 6% from 2011 to 2015. Check out Durden's cool charts where he plots believable estimates on top of the Treasury's rosy ones. Durden says we'll have well over a 120% debt-to-GDP ratio by 2015.

So anyway, how did I cut the deficit? Here were my choices:

Defense

> Quick end to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (30,000 regional troops by 2013)

> Cancel or delay various defense systems and platforms (like the boondoggle Osprey and F-35)

> Improve military efficiency

Environment

> Impose upstream price on GHG emissions

Health care

> Public option (save money, cover everybody, but grandma becomes Soylent Green -- good deal, right?)

> Negotiated Medicare drug prices

Social Security/Retirement

> Increase cap on taxable earnings to 90% (up from about 82% today)

> Progressive price indexing of Social Security

> Raising the normal retirement age of Social Security (increasing 2 months per year starting 2016, up to age 70 by 2040)

Spending

> Freeze nominal discretionary spending at 2013 level (education, research, transportation, DOJ, DOS, etc.)

Taxes

> Financial speculation tax (0.25% on sale or purchase of stock)

> Allow all of Bush's cuts in marginal rates to sunset

> Do not modify estate and gift tax rates when Bush's tax cuts expire

> Convert mortgage deduction with 15% credit

And voila! Painful, maybe. Effective, you bet. Play around with the choices and see how much you can cut the deficit. Unfortunately this calculator won't let you get down to the level of detail that some of you would prefer, for instance "Cancel all school lunches and afterschool programs," "Abolish Medicare, Social Security and the Department of Education," or "Cancel Congressional pensions and cut their pay by 50%." So, this calculator may be a bit simplistic but it gives you an accurate idea of the relative effect of each option on the U.S. budget deficit. You can also see how we'd compare to other countries's debt-to-GDP.

Fat America: More to love?

What, they don't have fast food in Colorado or something? This map of adult obesity is like something out of Red Dawn: the entire nation is crimson, red, or purple, and there sits blue Colorado, a lone outpost in the middle. "Pack up the car, honey, we're headed for Colorado where they're still free!..."

The South and Oklahoma are particularly fat. I wonder why that is? And why Oklahoma too? Is that like fatness by association? Actually, this social epidemic is scarier than a viral epidemic, as research has shown that obesity can spread and infect others across non-physical social networks via vectors like e-mail, phones, and computers.




The map of childhood obesity is also heavily weighted toward the South (har-har). Fat kids are nothing to laugh at though. I mean, they used to be, back when there was like 1 or 2 fat kids in the whole class, but now 1 out of every 5 or 6 American kids is obese. Pretty soon the fatty majority will be making fun of the healthy-weight kids: "Hey, bean pole, are your parents too poor to afford the Super Size Menu or what?" and "Did you make yourself throw up after lunch again, Lohan?" or "You have to do extra situps in gym class for all of us, lightweight!" Oh wait, I forgot: American kids don't have gym class anymore....

At the bottom of the report, you can click on your state a more in-depth look at its fatness: "F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2010."

Below are two states of interest. So is Ohio 1.5% skinnier than Kentucky or just 1.5% less fat? Semantics, I guess.

New Report: Kentucky Ranks Seventh Most Obese State in the Nation

June 29, 2010 Trust for America's Health

Kentucky was named the seventh most obese state in the country, according to the seventh annual F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2010 report from the Trust for America's Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). The state's adult obesity rate is 30.5 percent, and, in Kentucky men are more obese than women at 31.4 percent. Now more than two-thirds of states (38) have adult obesity rates above 25 percent.


New Report: Ohio Ranks 13th Most Obese State in the Nation
June 29, 2010 Trust for America's Health

Ohio was named the 13th most obese state in the country, according to the seventh annual F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future 2010 report from the Trust for America's Health (TFAH) and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). The state's adult obesity rate is 29 percent, and, in Ohio men are more obese than women at 30.2 percent. Now more than two-thirds of states (38) have adult obesity rates above 25 percent.

GOP's Graham slams teabaggers

"Graham said he challenged them: ' 'What do you want to do? You take back your country -- and do what with it?'. . . . Everybody went from being kind of hostile to just dead silent.'"

Yeah, you teabaggers, what do you want, besides abolishing the Department of Education and the EPA? (Crickets chirping)

Being in a constant state of anger & fear, and waiting next to the TV or radio to get your marching orders from shock jocks is dangerous. You are whipping yourselves up into a frenzy so that you can be easily used and abused to further somebody else's agenda, like, well, "drill, baby, drill!" for example.

Lindsey Graham spits out tea party

By Howard Kurtz

July 2, 2010 | Washington Post

The tea party has no shortage of critics, especially among left-leaning folks who regard it with a mixture of anxiety and suspicion.

But deciphering what this movement stands for can be like nailing Jell-O to the wall. It's not a real party, it has no platform, it's not clear who the members are, and it seems to encompass a range of views on the right.

Journalists too often characterize the tea people by the craziest fringe that shows up at rallies with offensive signs. Polling suggests they are largely small-government, anti-Obama activists -- assuming pollsters can get a good sample among folks who don't have to register for an official party -- but they seem more united by generalized anger than specific solutions.

Republicans love the grass-roots enthusiasm that the tea party generates -- even though the followers theoretically blame both parties for the mess in Washington -- but some are wary of being tarred with a brand that may turn off independents.

And then there's Lindsey Graham.

The South Carolina senator has already ticked off the right by being willing to negotiate deals with Democrats. He doesn't see bipartisanship as a dirty word.

Now he's turned his tart tongue on the tea types.

What's more, the New York Times Magazine brands him "This Year's Maverick"--which, given the source, is unlikely to boost his standing in some GOP circles.

Since it began posting articles online in midweek, the Times Magazine has boosted its impact to newsmagazine levels -- and I expect this new piece by Robert Draper will be no exception:

" 'Everything I'm doing now in terms of talking about climate, talking about immigration, talking about Gitmo is completely opposite of where the Tea Party movement's at,' Graham said. . . . On four occasions, Graham met with Tea Party groups. The first, in his Senate office, was 'very, very contentious,' he recalled. During a later meeting, in Charleston, Graham said he challenged them: ' 'What do you want to do? You take back your country -- and do what with it?'. . . . Everybody went from being kind of hostile to just dead silent.'

"In a previous conversation, Graham told me: 'The problem with the Tea Party, I think it's just unsustainable because they can never come up with a coherent vision for governing the country. It will die out.' Now he said, in a tone of casual lament: 'We don't have a lot of Reagan-type leaders in our party. Remember Ronald Reagan Democrats? I want a Republican that can attract Democrats.' Chortling, he added, 'Ronald Reagan would have a hard time getting elected as a Republican today.' "

Yow. He's saying the tea party has no answers, and that his party has moved so far to the right that Reagan would be seen as a squishy moderate.

Graham didn't duck when asked why the Original Maverick, John McCain, wasn't with him on his compromise efforts: "John's got a primary. He's got to focus on getting re-elected. I don't want my friend to get beat."

The lead for Politics Daily is Graham saying: "I ain't gay." Which I guess was a rumor out there.

Meanwhile, "three of 10 Americans describe themselves in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll as Tea Party supporters. . . . They are overwhelmingly white and Anglo, although a scattering of Hispanics, Asian Americans and African Americans combine to make up almost one-fourth of their ranks. . . .

"Nine in 10 are unhappy with the country's direction and see the federal debt as an ominous threat to its future. Almost as many say neither President Obama nor most members of Congress deserve re-election. . . . Nearly half say blacks lag in jobs, income and housing 'because most African Americans just don't have the motivation or willpower to pull themselves up out of poverty.' One-third of non-supporters agree."

[Hey now! There's a confession for you! - J]

Liberals are buzzing about the Times piece. "As a matter of policy," says Washington Monthly's Steve Benen, "I don't agree with Graham about much of anything, but all of these observations are entirely sound. The reason I put 'movement' in quotes every time I write about the Tea Partiers is that it's a contingent with no clear agenda, no leadership, no internal structure, and no meaningful connection to reality. Its passionate members, while probably well meaning, appear to have no idea what they're talking about. Genuine political movements -- civil rights, women's suffrage, labor unions -- have, as Graham put it, a 'coherent vision.' The Tea Party has Hitler signs and a cable news network, but that's not much of a substitute."

Sh*tMyDadSays

I'm probably way behind the hipster-alt curve on this one, since this site has already gone "viral," (remember back when something going viral was scary and bad?), but it's definitely worth checking out. And it doesn't take long.

If somebody wants to spend money on the eponymous book and tell me if it's worth reading, I'd be grateful.

http://shitmydadsays.com/

Outsourced school tests rife with errors

Yet more evidence that the free market works every time it's tried.

Sure, those public school kids may be getting dumber by taking less-than-perfect tests developed by a private company, but they've got to see the big picture: Look how much money the school saved!

Effishensy, efishensy, efishensey!

Mass. school district tests rife with errors

June 29, 2010 | AP

URL: http://www.aolnews.com/story/mass-school-district-tests-rife-with/1141559?cid=46