- Regardless of when the process was begun, stabilizing federal debt as a percentage of GDP would require that income tax receipts or benefit payments change substantially from their currently projected path.
- The longer policymakers waited to implement a policy change, the more debt would grow in relation to GDP, and the greater the policy changes needed to stabilize it would be.
- If the option of increasing income tax rates was chosen, the effects of delaying implementation would be greater than they would be under the option of cutting benefits: Increases in interest costs would be larger, GDP and household consumption would be lower, and debt as a percentage of GDP would be higher in the long run.
- Under either option, the negative effects of delaying the implementation of policy changes on people’s consumption and labor supply would be disproportionately borne by younger people and lower-income people.
Bessette/Pitney’s AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS: DELIBERATION, DEMOCRACY AND CITIZENSHIP reviews the idea of "deliberative democracy." Building on the book, this blog offers insights, analysis, and facts about recent events.
Search This Blog
Saturday, May 7, 2022
Debt: Pay Now or Pay More Later
CBO analyzes the effects of waiting to stabilize the federal debt.
Labels:
budget,
debt,
deficit,
economic policy,
government,
inequality,
political science,
politics,
taxation