If America descends into Greek-style fiscal chaos, there’s no doubt that entitlement programs will be the main factor. Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Disability are all fiscal train wrecks today, and the long-run outlook for these programs is frightful.
Just look at these numbers from the Bank for International Settlements and OECD to see how our fiscal future is bleaker than many of Europe’s welfare states.
If we don’t implement the right kind of entitlement reform, our children and grandchildren at some point will curse our memory.
But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t worry about other parts of the budget, including the so-called discretionary programs that also have been getting bigger and bigger budgets over time.
That’s why I was a bit perturbed to read Veronique de Rugy’s piece in National Review Online, which implies that these programs are “shrinking” and being subject to a “Big Squeeze.”
…there is another number to look at in that budget. It’s the shrinking share of the budget consumed by discretionary spending (spending on things like defense and infrastructure) to make space for mandatory spending and interest. This is the Big Squeeze. …in FY 2014 mandatory spending plus interest will eat up 67 percent of the budget, leaving discretionary spending with 33 percent of the budget (down from 36 percent in FY 2012). Now by FY 2023, mandatory and interest spending will consume 77 percent of the total budget. Discretionary spending will be left with 23 percent of the budget.
But all that’s really happening here is that entitlement outlays are growing faster than discretionary spending.
Here’s some data from the Historical Tables of the Budget, showing what is happening to spending for both defense discretionary and domestic discretionary. And these are inflation-adjusted numbers, so the we’re looking at genuine increases in spending.
As you can see, defense outlays have climbed by about $100 billion over the past 50 years, while outlays for domestic discretionary programs have more than tripled.
If that’s a “Big Squeeze,” I’m hoping that my household budget experiences a similar degree of “shrinking”!
To be fair, Veronique obviously understands these numbers and is simply making the point that politicians presumably should have an incentive to restrain entitlement programs so they have more leeway to also buy votes with discretionary spending.
But I’d hate to think that an uninformed reader would jump to the wrong conclusion and decide we need more discretionary spending.
Particularly since the federal government shouldn’t be spending even one penny for many of the programs and department that are part of the domestic discretionary category. Should there be a federal Department of Transportation? A federal Department of Housing and Urban Development? A federal Department of Agriculture?
No, NO, and Hell NO. I could continue, but you get the idea.
The burden of federal government spending in the United States is far too high and it should be reduced. That includes discretionary spending and entitlement spending.
P.S. Since I don’t want to get on Veronique’s bad side, let me take this opportunity to call attention to her good work on properly defining austerity,. And if you watch her testimony to a congressional committee, it’s also quite obvious that she also understands that the real problem is bloated and wasteful government spending.
P.P.S. For those who don’t have the misfortune of following the federal budget, “entitlements” are programs that are “permanently appropriated,” which simply means that spending automatically changes in response to factors such as eligibility rules, demographic shifts, inflation, and program expansions. Sometimes these programs (such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc) are referred to as “mandatory spending.”
The other big part of the budget is “discretionary spending” or “appropriations.” These are programs funded by annual spending bills from the Appropriations Committees, often divided into the two big categories of “defense discretionary” and “nondefense discretionary.”
[…] Entitlement Spending Is America’s Biggest Fiscal Challenge, but Discretionary Spending Is Still Fa… […]
[…] I’ve previously explained the difference between entitlement spending and discretionary spending. […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] ever fewer people know that Republican presidents even increase domestic spending (discretionary outlays plus entitlements) faster than […]
[…] ever fewer people know that Republican presidents even increase domestic spending (discretionary outlays plus entitlements) faster than […]
[…] ever fewer people know that Republican presidents even increase domestic spending (discretionary outlays plus entitlements) faster than […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion that rising entitlement expenditures crowd out other spending and lead to middle class tax hikes. Those things may happen at some point, particularly once we […]
[…] on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion that rising entitlement expenditures crowd out other spending and lead to middle class tax hikes. Those things may happen at some point, particularly once we […]
[…] automatically give people money, they are not part of the annual appropriations process (the “discretionary spending” parts of the budget that are determined on a yearly […]
[…] automatically give people money, they are not part of the annual appropriations process (the “discretionary spending” parts of the budget that are determined on a yearly […]
[…] shutdown does not alter the amount of entitlement spending and it does not change annually appropriated spending. And since bureaucrats always get back pay for their involuntary vacations, there aren’t any […]
[…] If we want spending to grow, say, 2% annually rather than 5% annually, that will require some degree of genuine entitlement reform. And it means finally enforcing some limits on annual appropriations. […]
[…] shutdown does not alter the amount of entitlement spending and it does not change annually appropriated spending. And since bureaucrats always get back pay for their involuntary vacations, there aren’t any […]
[…] shutdown does not alter the amount of entitlement spending and it does not change annually appropriated spending. And since bureaucrats always get back pay for their involuntary vacations, there aren’t any […]
[…] are the biggest long-run problem. But I point out that if GOPers aren’t willing to tackle the low-hanging fruit of pork-filled appropriations, that doesn’t fill me with optimism that they will ever adopt genuine entitlement […]
[…] I write constantly (some would say incessantly and annoyingly) about entitlement spending. And I occasionally write about discretionary spending. […]
[…] I write constantly (some would say incessantly and annoyingly) about entitlement spending. And I occasionally write about discretionary spending. […]
[…] I write constantly (some would say incessantly and annoyingly) about entitlement spending. And I occasionally write about discretionary spending. […]
[…] I write constantly (some would say incessantly and annoyingly) about entitlement spending. And I occasionally write about discretionary spending. […]
[…] I write constantly (some would say incessantly and annoyingly) about entitlement spending. And I occasionally write about discretionary spending. […]
[…] I even outlined the strategy that was necessary to achieve success, at least with regards to so-called discretionary spending. But I included a very important postscript as part of that […]
[…] close by noting that this isn’t the end of the world. Yes, we have far too much discretionary spending, and the additional spending in this agreement is bad news. That being said, the extra outlays are […]
[…] close by noting that this isn’t the end of the world. Yes, we have far too much discretionary spending, and the additional spending in this agreement is bad news. That being said, the extra outlays are […]
[…] relates to the GOP’s failure to control “discretionary” spending. That’s the part of the budget that funds the Pentagon, as well as providing most of the outlays for departments that […]
[…] And if Congress doesn’t comply, he should use his veto pen and we’ll have a partial shutdown, which basically effects the “non-essential” parts of the federal government that presumably shouldn’t be funded anyhow. […]
[…] his so-called “skinny budget” back in March (dealing with the parts of Leviathan that are annually appropriated), I applauded several of the specific […]
[…] so-called “skinny budget” back in March (dealing with the parts of Leviathan that are annually appropriated), I applauded several of the specific […]
[…] because of Social Security and the health entitlements. By the way, the top middle column on “other noninterest spending” shows one thing that is real, which is that defense spending has fallen as a share of GDP since […]
[…] because of Social Security and the health entitlements. By the way, the top middle column on “other noninterest spending” shows one thing that is real, which is that defense spending has fallen as a share of GDP […]
[…] that he’s proposing is to rearrange the allocation of annually appropriated spending (the so-called discretionary […]
[…] defense than it was back in the 1960s, even after adjusting for inflation. And outlays for “domestic discretionary” programs also have […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] you add discretionary (annually appropriated) spending to the mix, as well as interest that is paid on the national debt, the numbers get even more […]
[…] waste also are minor compared to all the supposedly non-controversial outlays that are part of the discretionary budget that funds various agencies and […]
[…] waste also are minor compared to all the supposedly non-controversial outlays that are part of the discretionary budget that funds various agencies and […]
[…] waste also are minor compared to all the supposedly non-controversial outlays that are part of the discretionary budget that funds various agencies and […]
[…] lost, at least not yet, but it’s very discouraging that this fight even exists. Controlling discretionary spending should be the easy […]
[…] After all, the forecast assumes that other spending will drop by 2.2 percent of GDP between 2015 and 2040. Yet is it really realistic to think that politicians won’t increase – much less hold steady – the amount that’s being spent on non-health welfare programs and discretionary programs? […]
[…] it’s true that America’s main fiscal problem is entitlement spending. And, yes, domestic discretionary spending is a bigger problem than the defense […]
[…] on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion that rising entitlement expenditures crowd out other spending and lead to middle class tax hikes. Those things may happen at some point, particularly once we […]
[…] Obama increased the type of government spending with the worst impact on the economy. Something to keep in mind when politicians, lobbyists, interest groups, and other insiders argue that there’s no need […]
[…] Entitlement Spending Is America’s Biggest Fiscal Challenge, but Discretionary Spending Is Still Fa… […]
[…] it’s true that America’s main fiscal problem is entitlement spending. And, yes, domestic discretionary spending is a bigger problem than the defense […]
[…] argues that you can’t balance the budget merely by cutting discretionary programs. That’s technically untrue, but it’s an accurate assessment of political […]
[…] other words, entitlements need to be reformed and discretionary spending needs to be reduced. Solve these underlying problems and you fix the symptoms of red ink and sluggish […]
[…] In other words, we’re already in a deep hole because the welfare state has radically expanded, and that hole will become much deeper in almost all nations in the absence of genuine entitlement reform and effective caps on so-called discretionary spending. […]
[…] that’s not an argument to waste money on so-called discretionary programs. Moreover, the appropriators are wildly wrong when they assert that appropriations spending already has been “cut to the […]
[…] In other words, we’re already in a deep hole because the welfare state has radically expanded, and that hole will become much deeper in almost all nations in the absence of genuine entitlement reform and effective caps on so-called discretionary spending. […]
[…] In other words, we’re already in a deep hole because the welfare state has radically expanded, and that hole will become much deeper in almost all nations in the absence of genuine entitlement reform and effective caps on so-called discretionary spending. […]
[…] than the assertion that social programs are shrinking (they’re simply not growing as fast), Barnes is right. By going on offense on Obamacare, Ted Cruz and his allies put the left on […]
[…] the government shutdown, which technically is a battle over annual appropriations legislation for so-called discretionary spending, is going to drag on for a […]
[…] That means entitlement reform, particularly if we want to control the size of government. But if we want to deal with the scope of government, it’s probably even more important to deal with the plethora of agencies, departments, and programs that comprise the “discretionary” parts of the federal budget. […]
[…] on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion that rising entitlement expenditures crowd out other spending and lead to middle class tax hikes. Those things may happen at some point, particularly once we […]
[…] drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion that rising entitlement expenditures crowd out other spending and lead to middle class tax hikes. Those things may happen at some point, particularly once we get […]
[…] it’s true that America’s main fiscal problem is entitlement spending. And, yes, domestic discretionary spending is a bigger problem than the defense […]
[…] it’s true that America’s main fiscal problem is entitlement spending. And, yes, domestic discretionary spending is a bigger problem than the defense […]
[…] other words, entitlements need to be reformed and discretionary spending needs to be reduced. Solve these underlying problems and you fix the symptoms of red ink and sluggish […]
[…] other words, entitlements need to be reformed and discretionary spending needs to be reduced. Solve these underlying problems and you fix the symptoms of red ink and sluggish […]
The GAO’s longterm forecast (CBO isn’t the only entity that does one) from December shows that in the “current policy” scenario entitlement+interest could be more than federal revenue by 2025. The GAO uses optimistic estimates for things like GDP (as the page below discusses), the scenario was updated using the Social Security administrations alternative forecasts for GDP growth and other figures, and it shows entitlements+interest could be more than revenue within this decade, see
http://www.politicsdebunked.com/article-list/budget-lottery
Even entitlement spending by itself will eventually be more than revenue.
The page has an interactive graph of future US debt and finances where various assumptions can be altered, e.g. using papers that indicate GDP growth may slow as national debt increases.
Except we don’t really even have a good idea how much entitlements will cost, it could be worse than that. The New York Times recently published an article questioning Social Security forecasts as being too optimistic. In realty it is worse than they say if you look at the figures. In the past the SSA’s forecasts have been off. In 1950 they forecast population for 2000.. and were off by 42%. What if their spending forecasts are off that much? There are many problems with their forecasts, for instance it turns out their claimed “high cost” scenario is high cost in nominal dollars, but *low cost* in real inflation adjusted dollars as you can see hidden in tables in their report. For more see:
http://www.politicsdebunked.com/article-list/ssaestimates
[…] Entitlement Spending Is America’s Biggest Fiscal Challenge, but Discretionary Spending Is Still Fa… […]
Social Security and Medicare have displaced personal savings with spend-now [Keynesian] government programs, thereby damaging long term growth. For more on how to fix this, see:
The way to limit Discretionary Spending is to provide legislators with an all-or-nothing annual bonus of approximately 2x salary, if spending is kept under 7% of GDP. This will cost approximately $200 million, to cap Discretionary Spending in excess of $1 trillion. Right now, there is no downside to excessive spending. Since they work for us, we should reward them for limiting the size of government. We must reorient their personal incentives.
The biggest challenge is the revival of an aging, shrinking, dying, white people under assault from non-Whites. this isnt an ideological battle of left vs right, GOP vs Dems, Socialism vs liberty. This is ethnic war against white people.
Why are hostile globalist elite defending Israel as a Jewish ethnostate with Jewish only immigration, but ravaging white majority Europe/North America into a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural Gulag with dystopian non-White colonization?
Why do gullible Whites kowtow to murderous Jewish/Crypto-Jewish commissars, who butcher White soldiers in bankrupting wars, confiscate White people’s guns, infiltrate & subvert our banks & spying agencies, indoctrinate White children in academia/mass media, & plunder White jobs, wages?
East Asia is 99% yellow. Africa is 90% Black. West Asia is 99% Brown. But 3rd world colonizers are annihilating Whites, just as China is swamping Tibet. Genocidal Jewish commissars murdered 100 million White Europeans from 1917-1991. Jews exterminated countless tribes since Old Testament.
“Native” Americans are not native. They invaded from East Asia. They slaughtered countless women/children. Muslims, Jews, China, India, Mayans, Africans all are guilty of slavery, genocide. From Greeks till today, Whites have been victims of Jewish, Turkic, Islamic, African slavery, genocide, imperialism.
Gullible Whites should reject subversive Jewish ideologies – libertarianism, feminism, liberalism, socialism, & reject hostile slanders of racism, collectivism.
Love to all, but White people must unite & organize to defend & advance their families, their fertility, their interests, their homelands. Urgent reading list:
goo.gl/iB777 , goo.gl/htyeq , amazon.com/dp/0759672229 , amazon.com/dp/1410792617
I’m 52 and as I’m the tail end of the baby boom, I have planned from the beginning that Social Security and Medicare would not be there for me.
Means testing of these programs will take place sometime in the next fifteen years or these programs will bankrupt the government, and by extention all of us.
Anyone with any savings should not expect to receive social security. Or at least your payouts will be subtracted by the amount of savings you DO have.
AND IF HE STOPPED SENDING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OVER TO THE ARABS AND TERRORISTS THE COUNTRY WOULD BE IN MUCH BETTER FINANCIAL SHAPE
SOCIAL SECURITY IS NOT AN ENTITLEMENT….IT WAS PAID FOR BY HARD WORKING TAXPAYERS….BUT CONGRESS DIPPED THEIR STICKY FINGERS INTO IT TO PAY FOR OTHER PROGRAMS. IF THEY HAD LEFT IT ALONE AND INVESTED IT WISELY…. SOCIAL SECURITY WOULD NOT BE LOSING MONEY