• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Do Budget Deficits Reflect American Character?

    Ezra Klein, Mark Thoma, and Paul Krugman take issue with David Brooks for suggesting that the failure in recent years to keep budget deficits under control represents a moral issue. “Every generation has an incentive to spend on itself,” Brooks writes, “but none ran up huge deficits until the current one. Some sort of moral norms prevented them.”

    Krugman and company are having none of it. In their view, busting deficits are just the natural result of a recession, not a matter of American virtue or character.

    “Current deficits reflect the aftermath of a generational financial crisis,” writes Klein. “They show an economy saving itself, not a generation spending on itself.” Agreeing, Thoma adds: “Saying that recent changes in debt reflect a moral issue when it is being driven by the recession is very misleading.” And Krugman ridicules the “utterly bizarre claim that the large budget deficits we’re currently running are the result of a loss of self-control.”

    Spending somewhat more on unemployment benefits in a recession is reasonable, even though extending benefits to 99 weeks was excessive, but could we not have exercised any self-control by cutting elsewhere to pay for them? Was spending $800 billion in “stimulus” and perpetually increasing annual federal budgets a matter of choice or inevitability?

    To be sure, the recession and anemic recovery under President Obama’s policies increased current budget deficits substantially while shrinking tax revenues and somewhat elevating federal spending. No doubt Brooks would agree with that observation. But the recession doesn’t begin to explain away the current deficits. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal government ran a budget deficit of about a trillion dollars in both 2009 and 2010 after adjusting revenues and spending for the recession. No doubt the picture was just as grim in 2011 and will be again this year.

    Worse—if anything could be worse—even after massive tax hikes and a passel of budget gimmicks, President Obama’s own budget shows a deficit that never dips below $610 billion in the next 10 years. No, the issue is not the recession. This issue is the choices we make and why.

    Former statesmen seemed to think we had a choice. Consider this message from President Grover Cleveland as he attempted to tighten the government’s belt by vetoing spending bills during a downturn in the 1890s: “Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character.”

    Likewise, a few decades later, President Warren Harding struck tones of a virtuous government living within its means in his acceptance speech for the Republican nomination. He indicated that government needed to axe spending, even during a sharp recession (which it did under his leadership):

    We will attempt intelligent and courageous deflation, and strike at government borrowing which enlarges the evil.… Needless spending and heedless extravagance have marked every decay in the history of nations.

    Moral conventional wisdom has surely changed since the 1930s. James Wilson traces the genesis of the change back to economist John Keynes. “Keynes,” writes Wilson, “was a moral revolutionary.… He subjected to rational analysis the conventional restraints on deficit financing, not in order to show that debt was always good but to prove that it was not necessarily bad.”

    Keynes’s message, Wilson continues, was that government deficit spending “should be judged by its practical effect and not by its moral quality.” By Keynes’s own standard then, the Obama stimulus has failed, because the economy did not respond and is only now picking up steam two years after the Obama stimulus began—despite, not because of, the stimulus and the rest of Obama’s policies.

    Setting aside the moral dimensions is a widely accepted view today, especially among the left. However, setting aside moral considerations for the sake of convenience is a dangerous path. There’s no denying that in recent years, spending money we don’t have and deferring the repayment to the future has eclipsed the right of our children to be born free of these obligations. And as our children will remind us in the coming years, that is an issue that morality cannot escape.

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to Do Budget Deficits Reflect American Character?

    1. William Brewer says:

      Of course it's a moral problem. But it goes deeper than that.

      Confused about sexuality, unfaithful to friends, fawning towards enemies, unwilling to control the borders, unable to pay the bills, unwilling to set a budget . . .

      Those are just a few of the things that cloud the future of the country. And there is a unifying thread.

      The first thing that comes to mind is "immaturity."

      Sentiment rather than reason, indulgence rather than self-control, naiveté rather than realism, all evoke an impression of immaturity– dare say childishness.

      The history of the Enlightenment has largely been the record of Western culture's rejection of Christianity, especially the notion of God as Father. That move has necessarily cascaded into a disparagement of fatherhood in general and from there into a disdain for masculinity as well.

      And therein lies the connection with immaturity– not to mention a deep offense to cultural sensibilities.

      Maturity and masculinity go together because maturity itself is stereotypically masculine, being rooted in the relative difficulty of socializing males versus females.

      Stated provocatively, the challenge of civilization is capturing the love, labor, and loyalty of males, not females.

      (Of course this is not to say the socialization of females is unimportant– it's just to say the socialization of females is much easier than the socialization of males and that any society that successfully orders the lives of males has, by virtue of that achievement, necessarily ordered the lives of females as well.)

      So the thread works this way:

      Rejection of Christianity –> Rejection of God as Father

      Rejection of God as Father –> Rejection of fatherhood

      Rejection of fatherhood –> Rejection of masculinity

      Rejection of masculinity –> Rejection of maturity

      All the data point in that direction.

      Western culture is a creature of Christianity and cannot be sustained without it.

      Although the process of demise may be slow, it is certain.

      Reversing the process of decline though is not a bottom-up effort. It won't work by focusing on maturity as an end in itself.

      Rather it has to start from the top down. Western culture has to reconnect with its "Father."

    2. Buzz Roye says:

      The Ponzi schemes of Enron, Madoff, Stanford, et al were wrong and immoral – and so is the federal scam system of ever increasing deficits, debt and unfunded liabilities – who benefits directly – career politicians on both sides of the aisle! – BREAK OUT THE PITCHFORKS!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.