NY Times conservative columnist outlines "principles" he'd like to see when we cut spending

[^_^ 5,021]

By DAVID BROOKS

Published: February 28, 2011

We’re going to be doing a lot of deficit cutting over the next several years. The country’s future greatness will be shaped by whether we cut wisely or stupidly. So we should probably come up with a few sensible principles to guide us as we cut.

The first one, as I tried to argue last week, is: Make Everybody Hurt. The sacrifice should be spread widely and fairly. A second austerity principle is this: Trim from the old to invest in the young. We should adjust pension promises and reduce the amount of money spent on health care during the last months of life so we can preserve programs for those who are growing and learning the most.

So far, this principle is being trampled. Seniors vote. Taxpayers revolt. Public employees occupy capitol buildings to protect their bargaining power for future benefits negotiations. As a result, seniors are being protected while children are getting pummeled.

...

In Washington, the Republicans who designed the cuts for this fiscal year seemed to have done no serious policy evaluation. They excused the elderly and directed cuts at anything else they could easily reach. Under their budget, financing for early-childhood programs would fall off a cliff. Tens of thousands of kids, maybe hundreds of thousands, would have their slots eliminated midyear.

Out in the states, the situation is scarcely better. Many governors of both parties are diverting money from schools in thoughtless and self-destructive ways. Hawaii decided to cut the number of days in the school year. Of all the ways to cut education, why on earth would you reduce student time in the classroom?

Texas is taking the meat cleaver approach. School financing will be cut by at least 13.5 percent, around $3.5 billion. About 85,000 new students arrive in Texas every year. There will be no additional resources to accommodate them.

Which leads to the third austerity principle: Never cut without an evaluation process. Before legislators and governors chop a section of the budget, they should make a list of all the relevant programs. They should grade each option and then start paying for them from the top down.

...

Instead, legislators and administrators are simply cutting on the basis of what’s politically easy and what vaguely seems expendable.

...

This period of austerity will be a blessing if it spurs an effectiveness revolution. It will be a disaster if the cutting is done politically or mindlessly. Unfortunately, that’s often how it is being done now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/opinion/01brooks.html

[Jenn! 918]

Sounds good to me.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Austerity hasn't been going so well in Europe.

[^_^ 5,021]

Austerity hasn't been going so well in Europe.

Explain.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Explain.

...everyone expected that austerity would be an economic drag. What they didn't expect is that austerity would worsen sovereign balance sheets (or at least not improve them). Of course there were warnings. Ireland was an early austerity adopter and it did squat. Richard Koo has been slamming the austerians, using the Japanese lesson, for some time.

And now we're getting results from the recent wave, and so far they're not that encouraging -- in fact, Moody's is now warning that austerity will make the sovereign credit worse in many situations (though of course they're behind the ball, as bond spreads in Ireland and Greece are now showing).

If these initial results hold, this will definitely pose a policy dilemma. In theory it should cause people to question their previous assumptions, though it's hard to say what will happen. Most likely the pro-austerity camp will simply double down on their calls, claiming governments aren't going far enough.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/european-austerity-failure-2010-8#ixzz1FMYJko84

[Danno 1,228]

David Brooks has become a "conservative"?

[^_^ 5,021]

David Brooks has become a "conservative"?

He isn't a screaming wingnut, so that means he's not a conservative?

[ready4ONE 5,400]

David Brooks has become a "conservative"?

Need more loon to earn that title?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Explain.

Premature austerity at work...

UK economy shrinks more than thought

LONDON — Britain’s economy contracted even faster than previously thought at the end of last year after the first fall in household spending in 18 months, denting expectations for an imminent rise in interest rates.

Official data on Friday showed the economy shrank 0.6% between October and December, worse than an initial estimate of a 0.5% decline and against analysts’ forecasts for an unchanged reading.

[Danno 1,228]

He isn't a screaming wingnut, so that means he's not a conservative?

Clearly he is more of a Centrist, no person on the Right was more excited about the hope and change obama promised than was David Brooks.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

What many on the Right fail to acknowledge or understand, is that government services are an integral part of the economy. They do seem to grasp the concept when it comes to Defense contracts, especially in Republican leaning districts. They know these places would become ghost towns without those contracts.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Clearly he is more of a Centrist, no person on the Right was more excited about the hope and change obama promised than was David Brooks.

David Brooks is about as conservative as Reagon was. It's just a sign of how far to the Right the modern Republican Party and their teabagging ways have gone off the deep end.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Brooks is hardly 'conservative' as he's proven over the years.... but that's hardly the point here.

The first one, as I tried to argue last week, is: Make Everybody Hurt. The sacrifice should be spread widely and fairly

Widely?

It's already been spreading widely. Do you see the monsterous unemployment? "books" say 9.5% when it's more like 20%... Cost of goods has gone up.. fuel prices have been bouncing like big titties at a strip club.

The only thing that hasn't gone up yet are interest rates and that's only because they are being kept artificially low.

Guess what, let me play liberal for a moment. The rich keep getting richer. Why? Not because of some evil scheme, but because congress be it Democrats prior or Republicans today have yet to kill the same derivatives market that started this whole shenanigans to begin with.

You want to make others hurt? Take awway the underground gambling market that the wealthy have there. Don't raise their taxes, just take away their ability to hide what they are doing and you will do enough damage to change things.

It's time for the "wealthy" who screwed the pooch to hurt now.

[Zero Sum 305]

You want to make others hurt? Take awway the underground gambling market that the wealthy have there. Don't raise their taxes, just take away their ability to hide what they are doing and you will do enough damage to change things.

Finally something that could actually work if done.

But think it through. Will the oligarchs allow this to happen? Think hard.

[mawilson 2,133]

Austerity hasn't been going so well in Europe.

Austerity is not a choice, it's a necessity. It's not like Greece could just continue spending.

The only alternative to austerity is outright bankruptcy.