Author Topic: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process  (Read 525110 times)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Global public debt = $100 Trillion
« Reply #1600 on: October 15, 2024, 09:48:30 AM »
Global public debt is set to reach $100 trillion, or 93% of global gross domestic product, by the end of this year, driven by the US and China, according to new analysis by the International Monetary Fund. In its latest Fiscal Monitor — an overview of global public finance developments — the IMF said it expects debt to approach 100% of GDP by 2030, and it warns that governments will need to make tough decisions to stabilize borrowing. Debt is tipped to increase in the US, Brazil, France, Italy, South Africa and UK, according to the IMF report, which urges governments to rein in debt. (Source: bloomberg.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Doug]  One more thing the US has more than its share of...

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile
Biden Admin Priorities in Action
« Reply #1601 on: October 17, 2024, 10:03:48 AM »
@amuse

DOGE: NASA originally gave Bechtel a contract for a simple launch tower during Trump's administration. At that time, it was supposed to cost $383 million and be completed by March 2023. When the Biden-Harris regime took over, they demanded new DEI and climate change requirements that set everything back. Now, under the bumbling Biden-Harris regime, the cost has ballooned to $2.7 billion with completion pushed to 2027, maybe even 2029. Nothing as complex as SpaceX's booster-catching tower, which Musk's team erected in a year.

For reference, SpaceX built Mechazilla—a taller and more capable launch tower—in just one year for $200 million. The Burj Khalifa, seven times taller, full of tenants and amenities, took five years and $1.5 billion. But NASA's tower? DEI mandates, climate directives, and a mountain of bureaucratic nonsense have crushed any chance for efficiency or innovation.

It's time to elect Trump, with the help of true innovators like Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and JD Vance, and dismantle the bloated government machine that's holding America back.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: October 18, 2024, 08:13:51 AM by Crafty_Dog »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
$1.833T Deficit, fed govt debt up $2.3T, Interest expense passed $1Trillion!
« Reply #1603 on: October 19, 2024, 04:12:01 PM »
CNBC story today, none of this is news to readers of the forum.

Highest deficit ever - outside of two covid years that involved massive business closures.

We are spending 37.4% more than we take in.  Just wondering, how much is too much for the spenders of the left.

Shouldn't the deficit be shrinking with higher tax rates and an alleged booming economy?  Is someone lying to us about the great economy?  And the fallacy (Big Lie?) that higher tax rates bring in more revenue - because usually they don't.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/10/18/us-deficit-tops-1point8-trillion-in-2024-as-interest-on-debt-surpasses-trillion-dollar-mark.html

The Biden administration rang up a budget topping $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2024, up more than 8% from the previous year and the third highest on record. Interest expense for the year totaled $1.16 trillion, the first time that figure has topped the trillion-dollar level. The Biden administration rang up a budget deficit topping $1.8 trillion in fiscal 2024, up more than 8% from the previous year ... the shortfall totaled $1.833 trillion, $138 billion higher than a year ago. ... The deficit came despite record receipts of $4.9 trillion, which fell well short of outlays of $6.75 trillion.

Government debt has swelled to $35.7 trillion, an increase of $2.3 trillion from the end of fiscal 2023.

Interest expense for the year totaled $1.16 trillion, the first time that figure has topped the trillion-dollar level
.


[Doug]  It's the spending stupid.

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Government spending, Peak Waste
« Reply #1605 on: October 25, 2024, 06:28:44 AM »
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2024/10/24/peak_waste_feds_sets_record_for_improper_payments_1067318.html

Again, there isn't any good news coming for this high spending gang that doesn't care where it goes.

The best item in the platform of the Trump second term is the idea that Elon Musk will examine federal programs for efficiency.  What I call zero based budgeting and the end of baseline budgeting.

Everything gets looked at for efficiency and exposed.  The opportunity for a 40% cut is not far fetched.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« Reply #1606 on: October 28, 2024, 07:21:39 AM »
Elon Musk announced last night that he thinks a Government Efficiency Commission can discover $2 trillion of waste, inefficiency, and fraud in the budget.   - CTUP

(Doug). Coincidentally, $2 trillion out of $7 trillion spending happens to be the Biden Harris deficit.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2024, 07:24:16 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« Reply #1607 on: October 28, 2024, 07:26:10 AM »
FEMA Is Spending Billions on Welfare for Illegal Migrants

the federal government spent $67 billion last year on migrant services and costs.

(A significant part of that was FEMA.)
« Last Edit: October 28, 2024, 07:28:28 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Misnamed inflation reduction act caused prescription drug prices to spike
« Reply #1608 on: November 01, 2024, 03:43:16 AM »
https://www.thecentersquare.com/national/article_b0b100ea-957c-11ef-ad2c-eba8b2be1119.html

How many times have we heard how these Brave politicians lowered the price for us on certain prescription drugs?

Deceit is a form of dishonesty. Medicare prices for prescription drugs are going up 60% in some states, 31% nationally.

When do people get tired of being lied to?

From the article :
"The Inflation Reduction Act added red tape and government mandates to Medicare Part D, which increased seniors' drug costs, he said.

"Before the IRA overhauled Part D, costs for Medicare drug benefits had stayed flat for the previous 18 years," Merritt said.

"So there's an IRA double whammy; it's that the law's spending contributed to higher general inflation of 7% since 2022," said Merritt, but caused "Medicare inflation" to spike 31% during those same two years."
« Last Edit: November 01, 2024, 03:48:31 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19742
    • View Profile
Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« Reply #1609 on: November 01, 2024, 05:56:19 AM »
"The Inflation Reduction Act added red tape and government mandates to Medicare Part D, which increased seniors' drug costs, he said."

Their immigration bill was not to control and restrict immigration - it was to process the illegals into the country even faster.


Even the labels they use as names for their bills are lies.

Stuffed with so much BS and often so long no one even knows what is in them.

I liked when someone (Kudlow) said they and their press lie by omission

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile
Federal Budget Battle Looms; What Will be Trump's Strategy?
« Reply #1610 on: November 08, 2024, 05:46:55 AM »
This will be a telling fight to watch. I hope Trump and Repubs ID sundry budgetary sinkholes (how are NGOs receiving funds that then end up in the pockets of those here illegally, hmm?) excise 'em, and dare Dems to hold up the budget due to it:

Trump wins tip scales for GOP on government funding
100+The Hill News by Aris Folley / Nov 8, 2024 at 6:27 AM//keep unread//hide

Republican electoral wins in both the presidential race and the Senate are changing the game on government funding, as Congress braces for a battle over federal spending when lawmakers return next week.

The increasing likelihood of a trifecta of Republican control in Washington is positioning GOP leaders squarely in the driver's seat in deciding whether to complete their annual funding work this year or punt the current Dec. 20 shutdown deadline into next year, when President-elect Trump is in office.

While a short-term stopgap would allow a potentially GOP-controlled Congress and a Republican president more say over how the government will be funded for much of 2025, it could also leave the party with a hefty to-do list in the first months of Trump presidency, between tying up spending, reckoning with the nation's debt ceiling, and other first 100-day priorities leaders are mulling.

Republicans will most likely control 53 seats in the Senate and Trump won the White House decisively. Control of the House has yet to be called, but Republicans are growing optimistic of maintaining their narrow majority in the lower chamber.

Congress currently has until Dec. 20 to pass legislation to prevent a government shutdown before the holidays. But that means a serious time crunch for both sides to hash out a deal to keep the lights on — even as most lawmakers aren’t saying which plan they would prefer.

A House GOP leadership aide said on Thursday that it’s “likely” lawmakers will try for another stopgap during the lame duck period, along with a disaster aid package that will include dollars for Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Small Business Administration (SBA).

Outgoing Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that he thinks “deciding how to spend the discretionary money that we have” is “important.”

“And I would hope we would put a greater priority than the current Senate has on doing the basic work of government, which is deciding how much to spend and getting it done as close to regular order as possible,” he said.

However, McConnell additionally said that lawmakers will soon “figure out how to finish up the year,” adding, “that always involves a conversation between [Senate Majority Leader Chuck] Schumer and myself as to how we wrap it up – but those conversations haven't started yet.”

One factor in those conversations may be who Republicans choose to replace McConnell as GOP leader after his historic stint in the post. Senate and House Republicans both intend to hold leadership races next week.

Another factor could be the ambitious agenda Republicans are already mapping out for Trump’s first 100 days and whether they, and the president-elect, want to add to it. They need to address the nation’s debt limit when they convene in January and have said they will prioritize extending the Trump tax cuts, which expire at the end of 2025, among other plans.

Trump has not expressed a preference on the timing of a government funding bill.

The question of how long to extend government funding for emerged as a central sticking point in negotiations ahead of the Sept. 30 shutdown deadline. An initial plan called for a keeping the government funded at the previous fiscal year’s levels through early next year, but House Republicans weren’t able to pass the legislation and eventually leaders settled on the Dec. 20 deadline.

Conservatives saw the strategy then as key to avoiding being jammed with an omnibus funding package packed with items and funding levels more favorable to Democrats. They also argued kicking the deadline into next year would allow Trump, if elected, a better chance to have more input over how the government is funded for most of the coming year.

But the six-month strategy drew opposition from multiple corners of the conference. Defense hawks at the time argued freezing funding at fiscal year 2024 levels for half a year would harm the military. Fiscal hawks, some of whom are wholly opposed to the very idea of a stopgap, were also critical of the stopgap for continuing funding at levels they already felt were excessive.

And some appropriators called for finishing the fiscal year 2025 funding work this year.

House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said in September he thinks lawmakers should instead focus on getting their funding work finished “and try and do it as expeditiously as possible.”

“I personally think it’s not a good thing to give a new president — and we’re going to have a new president — an immediate fiscal crisis,” Cole said. “But again, that’s probably going to be up to the winner of the election, to be honest. If they want it, then Congress is always happy to pass the ball.”

Those same intraparty rifts could pose similar hurdles in the months ahead as both sides look for a solution to avert a shutdown next month.

Republicans in both chambers have been drawing red lines around the prospect of a Christmastime omnibus funding package, which combines all 12 government funding bills, amid fears from conservatives that’s where Congress was headed after previously setting the Dec. 20 funding deadline.

“We have broken the Christmas omni, and I have no intention of going back to that terrible tradition,” Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said in September, while also ruling out the chances of any minibus packages, adding: “We’re not going to do any buses.”

Still, though Democrats’ leverage over the funding process significantly diminished with the election results, their votes will likely be required to pass government funding. Democrats currently control the Senate and House Republicans have been unable to pass their own funding bills without Democratic votes.

That could hold true even in January, and Republicans’ Senate majority is not filibuster-proof.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters on Thursday that the Biden administration will focus its remaining days partly on tying up loose ends on the spending side, including disaster relief.

“I can tell you things that we're going to focus on in the upcoming 74 days. We're going to make sure that we keep the government open,” Jean-Pierre said. “We're going to deliver assistance for communities devastated by hurricanes Helen and Milton and other recent disasters.”

However, she stopped short of providing further details as to how the administration would prevent a shutdown next month as questions remain over how government funding and disaster relief will be tackled before Congress ushers in a new session come January.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Thursday that Congress should pass a bill this year that covers most of 2025.

“It does not matter who is in the White House or who controls the House and the Senate. Close margins in the House next year—and the lack of a supermajority for Republicans in the Senate—mean Democrats and Republicans will still need to work together if we want to pass funding bills,” she said. “Whether we do it now or wait until next year, no single chamber or political party can act alone to fund the programs and services hardworking Americans depend on. Leaving all our work for January is a mistake.”

https://thehill.com/business/budget/4979972-gop-control-government-funding/

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19435
    • View Profile
Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« Reply #1611 on: November 14, 2024, 08:28:03 AM »
New fiscal year started October 1, Biden's last budget year. Results for October, spending up 24%, revenues down 19%, compared with October of the previous year.
https://www.zerohedge.com/economics/us-deficit-explodes-blowout-october-deficit-means-2nd-worst-start-us-fiscal-year-record

I wonder what people mean when they say the country is headed in the wrong direction...

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile
Inflation Reduction Act (Which Doesn’t) Contains Drug Savings Element …
« Reply #1612 on: November 16, 2024, 11:45:19 PM »
… that increases costs:

Let The Numbers Speak: Prescription Drug Provisions In The Inflation Reduction Act
Ge Bai
Contributor
Ge Bai is professor of accounting & health policy at Johns Hopkins.

Nov 14, 2024,12:49pm EST
Updated Nov 16, 2024, 03:57pm EST

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 introduced significant changes to the Medicare Part D prescription drug program, affecting tens of millions of seniors and other Medicare beneficiaries. Early evidence has now emerged, offering the public a glimpse into the law’s scorecard.

This law is well-intentioned. As the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services stated, it is expected to “expand benefits, lower drug costs, keep prescription drug premiums stable, and improve the strength of the Medicare program.”

The law changed certain benefit designs for Medicare Part D standalone prescription drug plans, including a lower cap on out-of-pocket spending and a new cap on premium growth rates. The redesign was initially estimated to cost taxpayers $30 billion over a decade.

The law also introduced price controls for prescription drugs under Medicare, which were anticipated to save taxpayers $160 billion over 10 years. Congress used the projected $130 billion net savings to fund green energy initiatives.

However, a low out-of-pocket cap increases utilization of expensive drugs and restricts insurance plans’ ability to steer patients toward more cost-effective treatment options, thus inflating premiums. While average basic premiums for Medicare Part D declined by 12% from 2017 to 2020, plan bids for 2025 nearly tripled, partly due to this and other aspects of benefit redesign.

With new evidence available, the Congressional Budget Office recently reported that federal spending on Part D would be $10 to $20 billion higher than previously projected, initially attributing the increase to the benefit redesign. The agency later explained that the increase is largely driven by higher-than-expected drug spending growth in 2023.

The Biden administration also sent taxpayer dollars—unauthorized by Congress—to Medicare Part D plans to offset the 2025 premium increases. This additional spending amounted to $5 billion in 2025 alone, with an extra $2 billion in interest expense over a decade. Therefore, the drug provisions in the law may not generate the savings as initially promised.

The law’s consequences extend beyond its impact on the federal budget. Recent analyses have demonstrated the chilling effect of the law on clinical trials and other R&D activities. This is unsurprising, as the bureaucratic price-setting process imposes regulatory uncertainty on biotech investors and innovators, along with lower expected revenues due to price controls.

Meanwhile, a lower out-of-pocket cap reduces patients’ price sensitivity, increasing revenue for drug manufacturers and discouraging them from lowering prices. In effect, the law has conflicting financial impacts on the biopharma industry and sends two problematic messages: don’t invest in new drugs and don’t lower your prices.

Another negative consequence of the law is a 26% decline in available Medicare Part D plans in 2025, reaching the lowest level since the program’s inception. Consequently, 3.5 million seniors are losing their Part D plans and may opt for Medicare Advantage plans, which cover both prescription drugs and medical benefits and are not directly affected by the law.

However, with increasing regulatory constraints and compliance costs, Medicare Advantage plans face new challenges in insurance carrier participation. In 2025, the plans for 1.5 million seniors will be terminated. As Medicare Advantage plans become an increasingly important option for providing American seniors with access to prescription drugs, policymakers must address these plans' challenges.

Taken together, the prescription drug provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act may not generate savings for taxpayers as initially promised, while destabilizing the Medicare Part D insurer market and creating problematic incentives for the biopharma industry.

If the goal is to improve drug access for low-income Medicare beneficiaries, this law represents a cautionary tale for future policymaking. Rather than detaching patients from their healthcare dollars and imposing price controls, directly subsidizing patients and promoting competition and innovation would produce long-lasting benefits for patients, industries, and taxpayers.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/gebai/2024/11/14/let-the-numbers-speak-prescription-drug-provisions-in-the-inflation-reduction-act/

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile
4 X the Bureaucrats Paid w/ the Federal Credit Card
« Reply #1613 on: November 19, 2024, 10:56:14 AM »
Somehow I don't think we are seeing ANY return on this vast increase in the number of paid federal pencil pushers, though we can rest easy knowing they vote reliably for the hand that feeds them, eh?

https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2024/11/19/hooray-you-wont-believe-how-much-more-government-youre-buying-n4934431

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72229
    • View Profile
Re: Government programs & regulations, spending, deficit, and budget process
« Reply #1614 on: November 19, 2024, 01:44:19 PM »
Great chart, and big picture timely with the DOGE Twins coming on stream!

Body-by-Guinness

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 3225
    • View Profile
The Regulatory Mine Field
« Reply #1615 on: November 20, 2024, 05:14:07 AM »
Dems make it impossible to open new US mines, leaving kids in third world countries to dig the materials we need for our daily lives:

https://pjmedia.com/john-stossel/2024/11/20/destructive-environmentalists-n4934460