Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Previewing the Long-Term Effects of TariffsThe dominant effect of the Trump tariffs will be to raise production costs on almost every American manufacturing firm.

It’s TDS to Suppose These Tariffs Are WorkingTrump has pushed the U.S. into an economic downturn that will be especially hurtful to Hoosiers.

Trump’s Tariff Recession Is HereMy new forecast, completed in late April, predicts a national recession began as early as March in reaction to Trump’s tarriffs.

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 262
economics 203
state and local government 188
education 186
indiana 173
economic development 171
taxes 146
budget and spending 145
law and public policy 144
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

August 8, 2011

Some Cuts in the Budget Deal

At the time of this writing, it is difficult to know exactly what the budget deal entails, but I will hazard a bit of analysis. What is clear is that the agreement to raise the debt ceiling demands an immediate 2.5 percent budget cut in each of the next 10 years.  This is to be followed by 4.3 percent in additional cuts per year to be determined by a blue ribbon commission over the next months. These cuts will come to military budgets, to entitlements and to the vast cornucopia of discretionary spending.  The share of cuts to each is a matter of speculation, but the economic consequences are better known.

First, the shrinking of America’s unseemly budget deficit should ease the worries of many.  The most important audience for this boost of confidence is those who would hire those Americans who need jobs.  We often call these people investors, but really they are small-business owners, mid-sized plant managers and the like.  The hiring of more workers depends upon their belief not so much in economic recovery as in the future profitability of their particular business.  Higher taxes might be fashionable among those who think the rich are undeservedly so, but they are very unwelcomed among those doing the hiring.  We need a long spell of more hiring before we tackle the supposed evils of wealth.

Second, any budget cut will include defense.  Some of these cuts can come from the modest peace dividend that will result from fewer forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.  However, most of the reduction will have to include deferred acquisition of new weapons systems and less frequent replacement and repair of existing equipment.  The military will train less and in less realistic (and therefore less costly) conditions.  We will close some installations in the U.S. and abroad; we will ask service members to contribute more to their health care and will provide them less attractive housing.  This is an unpleasant and sobering reality.

Cuts to domestic programs will be more modest and nothing like the long-term reforms that changing demographics will ultimately foist upon us.  Reimbursement to health care providers for Medicaid and Medicare will decline.  This will clobber doctors, hospitals and other healthcare workers.  Social service expenditures will shrink.  We will cut infrastructure investments on roadways, public transit, sewer and water upgrades and the like.  All of this will be done slowly.  That is critical because government spending—unlike a bandage on a scraped knee—does not hurt less because it is removed quickly.

Like many Americans, I am troubled by the scope and scale of a federal government that does too many things too poorly.  Remedying this would help remind many of the great and wondrous nature of American government and perhaps prompt more Americans to remember that our government is an institution to be loved and nurtured, not vilified and despised.  Though it is imperfect, this budget agreement begins in earnest the lengthy effort to focus government, balance the budget and shrink the debt.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/581/some-cuts-in-the-budget-deal

Tags: budget and spending, bailout and debt, economic recovery


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close