August 27, 2004

ARE SUPPLY SIDERS EVER WRONG?:

Md. Budget Surplus Surpasses Forecasts (John Wagner, August 27, 2004, Washington Post)

Maryland finished its budget year with a $309.7 million surplus as tax collections came in well above projections, state officials announced yesterday, reflecting a trend that has boosted revenue in Virginia and the District, as well.

Turns out you can grow your way out of deficits...

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 27, 2004 12:29 PM
Comments

Hmmm. Ya think they'll repeal those recent tax increases in Virginia? Nahhh, didn't think so.

Posted by: M. Murcek at August 27, 2004 2:07 PM

Too Bad they think its vodoo economics in Ohio.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at August 27, 2004 2:32 PM

Of course revenues have gone up in Maryland and Virginia, the Federal Government under Bush is spending money like..theres no tomorrow?...drunken sailor?... anyway a lot of money.

Posted by: h-man at August 27, 2004 3:30 PM

There is a war on, so spending so go up for defense. On the other hand, domestic spending is also way up.

Posted by: pchuck at August 27, 2004 4:32 PM

The Federal deficit has shrunk this year as revenue has grown.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at August 27, 2004 5:12 PM

Yeah, but didn't we have a surplus before Bush got in?

Posted by: Chris Durnell at August 27, 2004 7:36 PM

The "surplus" meant that more was being taken in than was spent. Since servicing the debt (which is not the same as a deficit) this means that taxes were too high.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 27, 2004 9:26 PM

Hit the fershlugginer "post" button instead of "preview". Try again...


The "surplus" meant that more was being taken in than was spent. Since servicing the debt (which is not the same as a deficit) is built into the budget, this means that taxes were too high.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 27, 2004 9:28 PM

You can only grow your way out of deficits if a) the economy is growing, and b) spending is restrained to growth at a rate (preferably far) lower than economic growth.

Fiscal discipline was forced upon the states the past few years, but don't bank on it lasting.

Posted by: jsmith at August 27, 2004 9:50 PM

Chris Durnell:

What we had was a projected surplus, not an actual surplus.
The projection wouldn't have survived the reality of the popped Tech Bubble and 9/11.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen at August 27, 2004 10:59 PM

"Yeah, but didn't we have a surplus before Bush got in?"

The fallacy is called post hoc ergo proctor hoc. The Federal tax system is very progressive it is therefore very highly leveraged to the capital markets, that are the most volital source of high incomes.

In the '90s we had the biggest stock market bubble that anyone now alive is likely to see in his adult lifetime. As a consequense thereof the government harvested tremendous revenues. At the same time, the Clinton administration ignored the gathering storm and systematically starved the millitary for resources. Result surplus.

In the spring of 2000, the stock market bubble burst. We have not yet regained 11,000 on the Dow which we hit in March 1999 and NASDAQ 5000 is a dim memory. The recession began in the spring of 2001, well before any policy action attributable to the Bush administration could have taken effect. Then came 9/11.

Posted by: Robert Schwartz at August 27, 2004 11:17 PM

There were on-budget surpluses of $1.9 billion and $86.6 billion in '99 and '00, and total surpluses of $69.2 billion, $125.6 billion, $236.4 billion and $127.4 billion from '98 to '01. No fallacy there.

Though the implication sure is...

Posted by: jsmith at August 27, 2004 11:25 PM
« WEEKEND RENTALS: | Main | LIVING IN A CAVE SAVES ON ROOM SERVICE »