If done well, an image can say a thousand words. Here are some of my favorites.
- An amazing chart put together by a Cato colleague showing that massive increases in spending and staff have had no positive impact on educational performance.
- A shocking chart exposing Obama’s miserable jobs performance compared to other Presidents.
- A chart showing the importance of saving and investment if we want workers to enjoy higher wages.
- An elaborate flowchart showing the TSA’s Orwellian (and incompetent) approach to airline security.
We can add another one to the list. The Heritage Foundation shows us what Obama has in mind when he talks about a “balanced” plan.
This chart, while horrifying and visually powerful, actually understates the case against Obama.
The President is not proposing to cut spending by $400 billion. He’s only proposing to reduce future spending growth by that amount. In other words, his “spending cut” is only a cut if you play the dishonest DC game of measuring “cuts” against a baseline of ever-expanding government.
To give you an idea of what this really means, here’s my chart showing the CBO projection of what will happen to spending if the budget is left on autopilot. That’s the blue line.
The red line, by contrast, shows the impact of Obama’s supposed $400 billion cut. Feel free to pull out a magnifying glass to examine the difference between the two lines.
All you need to know is that the burden of government spending will climb by about $2 trillion over the next 10 years without Obama’s budget plan.
But if we enact Obama’s plan, the burden of spending will climb by…drum roll please…about $2 trillion over the next 10 years. In other words, it’s not much more than a rounding error.
P.S. Don’t forget that revenues also are projected to rise dramatically over the next 10 years, even if the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts are made permanent. All that’s actually needed to balance the budget is modest spending restraint, restraining outlays so they grow by an average of 2.5 percent. In other words, good things happen if policy makers comply with Mitchell’s Golden Rule.
s teeth, hair, and skin, and no tools are required for assembly.
>>>>>>If you agree, pass this on. We have had other
pets sincee Maggie and faced the same end-of-life decizion years later
with our two springer spaniels.
[…] The President says (with a straight face, so he does have acting talent) that he also wants “spending cuts” as part of his “balanced approach.” […]
[…] The President says (with a straight face, so he does have acting talent) that he also wants “spending cuts” as part of his “balanced approach.” […]
[…] The President says (with a straight face, so he does have acting talent) that he also wants “spending cuts” as part of his “balanced approach.” […]
[…] The President claims he has a “balanced approach” that involves budget cuts, but look at the second chart at this link and you will see that he’s really proposing bigger […]
[…] By the way, don’t think the higher taxes will be balanced by any spending restraint. Click here to see a very depressing chart about Obama’s “balanced” proposal. […]
[…] The President claims he has a “balanced approach” that involves budget cuts, but look at the second chart at this link and you will see that he’s really proposing bigger […]
Anyone with with a knowledge of 7th grade math should be ablee to see through this farce. Unfortunately, a large % of the Obama vboters are on a 6th grade level. All the Big O had to do was lie and lie and lie, distort and distort and distort.
We are in serious trouble fiscally and taxes will not get us out of the mess. This absurd tax the richest scheme is complete nonsense. Wait until the unenlightened discover that their taxes will increase regardless of their income bracket. I say to hell with it, go over the fiscal cliff. It won’t be any wose than what the future already holds.
It appears that the spedning cuts Pres. obama had indicated was the $400 billion national defense cuts. No other cuts were made.
Every month we will have Fiscal Cliff unless we cut excessive spending. No amount of revenue could solve thie problem.
The WH has been operating without a budget. They kept on growing expenditures regardless of the over budget expenditures. 22 million are out of jobs, and this population could not contribute to the system.
Taxing the rich and job makers will just erode revenue and therefore increase the unemployed people.
I thinbk taxing the bread makers and the employers more will just continuesly destroy our economy.
Is this really the purpose of this cliff? Destroy the United States that was once
the beacon of hope for the whole world. That was the time when Americans took pride by working hard, been been innovative, without being punished through high taxation.
Since Pres. Obama came into office in 2009, he creates policies, regulations that are abscure, deceptive, and dishonest to the American people.He cleverly handles them well because he compounded his supporters with bailouts, goodies, and entitlements to those who never earned it.More so with his capitalist cronies.
Fiscal Cliff happened because of his explosive government expenditures. He created very huge government which grew and multiplied his followers like labor unions, and welfare dependents, and cronies. These tricks will never be correctted because hundreds of millions are dependents to his socialistic and dictatorial style of government. Hugo Chaves did this when he came to power!
The hard working American taxpayers, young, old, and retired are the victims of these pervasive deceptions and lies!
[…] good example. The President claims he has a “balanced approach” that involves budget cuts, but look at the second chart at this link and you will see that he’s really proposing bigger […]
Reblogged this on OneSquareLight.
[…] claims he has a “balanced approach” that involves budget cuts, but look at the second chart at this link and you will see that he’s really proposing bigger […]
[…] I’m very concerned about both the fiscal cliff and its possible replacements. It will bebad news if we get an automatic tax hike on January 1, and it will be bad news if that tax increase is replaced by an even more odious plan concocted by the White House. […]
[…] The President says (with a straight face, so he does have acting talent) that he also wants “spending cuts” as part of his “balanced approach.” […]
[…] I’m very concerned about both the fiscal cliff and its possible replacements. It will be bad news if we get an automatic tax hike on January 1, and it will be bad news if that tax increase is replaced by an even more odious plan concocted by the White House. […]
[…] The President says (with a straight face, so he does have acting talent) that he also wants “spending cuts” as part of his “balanced approach.” […]
Smoke and mirrors. Wow I’m tired of this manipulator’s smoke and mirrors.
I’m offended by the endless repetition of the term “fiscal cliff.” I just wrote a post on this– that if you want control, to create a crisis, and that’s exactly what’s happening here. This concept is being drilled into our heads as severely as “the American people,” “homeland security,” “the war on terror,” and other transparent catchphrases designed to foster dependency upon the federal government. Because in a crisis, we should all expect to be bailed out by the feds, right? (uh huh).
“understates” if what you say in the whole piece is true why use that understatement?
It is a lie from Heritage Foundation.
[…] Obama’s Fiscal Plan: Real Tax Hikes and Fake Spending Cuts Excerpt: […]
America is toast and at this juncture there is no way out of the mess. I suspect that we are going down and it won’t be a soft landing.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
If Republicans don’t fight this tooth and nail, they don’t deserve to win another election.
Dan, when you report the government’s so-called decreases against an imaginary baseline, dishonest Washington maths, why don’t you also calculate and report the real numbers according to genuine accounting principles. The ones used by big corporations as well as Cato, I imagine, increases against the latest year’s actuals.
Then we’d start seeing the real picture, what’s really being proposed…