The Debt Ceiling

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concludes that if enacted, John Boehner’s debt ceiling plan “could well produce the greatest increase in poverty and hardship produced by any law in modern U.S. history.”

That sounds to me like something that would create strong incentives to not be poor and, indeed, to fully incentive richness. Consequently, we’ll have massive economic growth. Right?

That’s Yglesias. The sad thing here is that Boehner’s plan is the only thing with any semblance of hope that it might actually pass.

Lord what fools these mortals politicians be.

Erik Kain

Erik writes about video games at Forbes and politics at Mother Jones. He's the editor of The League though he hasn't written much here lately. He can be found occasionally composing 140 character cultural analysis on Twitter.


  1. Isn’t this just CBPP’s schtick? This is about as interesting a sentence as “PETA’sPhysicians’ Committee for Responsible Medicine concludes that eating meat is bad for you.” Of course they’re going to predict people dying in the streets whenever any budget cuts are proposed—it’s what they do.

    The bottom line is that $300B a year in cuts out of a $3800B budget just isn’t that big a deal. It wouldn’t even bring us back down to the trend line.

    • Oh I’m sure it’s half propaganda. Everything is. Still this whole thing is just a farce of epic proportions. I’m sick and tired of it.

    • They said the same thing in 1996 on welfare reform. Professional poverty pimps.

      [The new law] would increase the number of children who are poor and make many children who are already poor poorer… No piece of legislation in U.S. history has increased the severity of poverty so sharply.
      – The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “The New Welfare Law,” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, August 13, 1996</i.

      • I notice that you didn’t post any evidence that they were wrong.

        • You have the burden of proof if you don’t like what was posted. It would be interesting to see you can make a principled argument about something instead of winging it.

          My point was that groups like this and guys like Greenstein say this at any drop of the hat, and perhaps more discriminating sources should be looked to.

  2. I don’t know the exact numbers from the CBO: something like 1 trillion in deficit-reducing savings over ten years. Given the way the economy may go, I don’t know that this counts as a big victory for the GOP.

    {{{off to find more details}}}

    • Oops. CBO said it’d reduce the deficit by 850 billion.

      • So 85 billion a year? Or is it, like, 8 billion this year and 200 billion the last year?

  3. E.D.:

    Another lefty think tank uses hyperbole to talk smack about the Repubs. Based on such such valid criticism my whole world view is shaken, I’ll run right out and give all my money to the Dems.

      • E.D.:

        If the CBPB can’t do any better than hyperbole then why should I or anyone else listen to them?

Comments are closed.