Hope is not a plan. Nostalgia will not bring back the days of 3% annual growth in our economy. Experts (economists) will explain to you that 3% expectation was the result of years and years of population growth, easy credit, and the expansion of global trade. All that is gone now. The '50s were fabulous for the United States, but the circumstances of the '50s are long gone. No other country on the planet could compete with the United States in the fifties due to WWII. Today, 2017, is 1000% different than the fifties.
"Trump budget seeks huge cuts to science and medical research, disease prevention"
Washington politics, By Joel Achenbach and Lena H. Sun May 23, 2017
Without science and medical research Tweety's budget growth targets, 3-4% and bigger hoped, are DOA - Dead On Arrival. Tweety's people / advisors / sycophants do not realize they have doomed America. They have doomed Tweety to ignominy and embarrassment as well.
Cuts to the Center of Disease Control WILL KILL people.
"The proposed cuts to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention drew an unusually sharp rebuke from former CDC director Tom Frieden, who went on Twitter to describe the administration's CDC request as “unsafe at any level of enactment. Would increase illness, death, risks to Americans, and health care costs.”"
More . . . No magic is going to save Tweety's foolish, even STUPID budget, so hopefully it is ignored by Congress.
"Rush Holt, CEO of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said a preliminary analysis indicates that the Trump budget would cut about 17 percent from the overall federal research effort. Holt, a physicist and former Democratic congressman from New Jersey, said cuts to research would have long-term economic implications.
“There's this rosy optimism that somehow growth will magically occur, and yet it cuts the principal source of that growth,” Holt said. The proposal “savages research. Economists are clear: That’s where we ultimately get our economic growth.”"
More . . .
"Slashing programs that normally have enjoyed bipartisan support is part of the Trump administration's effort to trim trillions of dollars in spending over the next decade while at the same time paying for tax cuts and increases in military spending."
More . . .
"The administration's detailed budget request calls the termination of many research-related programs, such as the Department of Energy's Advanced Research Project Agency - Energy (ARPA-E). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's grant and education program, which has $262 million in 2017 funding, would be zeroed out. “These grant and education programs generally support State, local, and/or industry interests, and these entities may choose to continue some of this work with their own funding,” the administration's budget document states."
There are patchwork, unfunded "twigs" and "berries" in the budget for emergencies, but those have NOTHING to help inspire economic growth.
Tweety, Paul Ryan, many Republicans think our country can survive on wmagic. Economist experts do not see the magic happening.
"Economists See Little Magic in Tax Cuts to Promote Growth"
By PATRICIA COHEN and NELSON D. SCHWARTZ, MAY 23, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/23/business/economy/trump-budget-tax-cuts-economic-growth.html?_r=0
"The basic idea is that shrinking the government’s share increases what people take home, encouraging workers to work more and investors to invest more. But while taxes can create incentives that can promote growth, liberal and conservative economists alike said there was no evidence that the White House budget announced on Tuesday would do so.
“The assumed effects on growth are just huge and unwarranted,” said William G. Gale, a co-director of the nonpartisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center and a former economic adviser to the first President George Bush."
More . . .
"Previous presidents have not had a lot of success using tax cuts to spur growth. “The historical record is pretty clear that large tax cuts don’t pay for themselves through economic growth,” said Michael J. Graetz, a professor of tax law at Columbia University.
The 1981 tax cut that President Ronald Reagan pushed through did provide a short jolt to the economy, Mr. Graetz said, but he pointed out that the administration was compelled to raise taxes in 1982 and 1984 to keep the deficit under control.
Tax cuts championed by President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003 performed even worse."
More . . . There are too many variables, and, as Tweety often says about complex issues like health care, no one knew it was so complex! It will be a lot harder than he or Ryan think it will be to fix the tax code or to grow the economy.
"There are lots of reasons to tinker with the tax code, many experts say, but the notion that there is a simple cause-and-effect relationship between cuts and growth is faulty. “Tax policy is clearly not some overwhelmingly powerful tool that affects growth,” Mr. Viard said. There are simply too many other things — like technology, worker productivity and aging — that can either muffle or overwhelm their impact."
But what do these economists know? They might be wrong! They have only studied how our economy works for roughly a collective ~740 years. Tweety is 70 so he surely knows what is best for our country, right?
"Actually, 37 of 37 economists disagree with Donald Trump's tax cuts plan for economy"
MAX EHRENFREUND, Last updated 02:28, May 9 2017
"Mnuchin said that Trump's economic policies could accelerate the pace of economic growth from about two per cent to as much as three per cent a year, but Judd is not buying the administration's numbers.
"The numbers do not add up," Judd said.
"We say that about all the presidents and their plans, and this - this is orders of magnitude worse," added Judd, who is affiliated with the conservative Hoover Institution at Stanford University. "The numbers are just in a different universe."
Judd said that not even President Ronald Reagan believed that cutting taxes would be so great for the economy that the cuts would pay for themselves. If hiring and investing did not pick up under Trump's plan, the government would be forced to borrow more to cover the difference, and experts warn that the additions to the national debt could become a burden on the economy."
