Biden Is Expected to Unveil $6 Trillion Spending Plan

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  3 weeks ago  •  39 comments

By:   Kate Davidson (WSJ)

Biden Is Expected to Unveil $6 Trillion Spending Plan
The White House is expected to release President Biden's first budget proposal Friday, offering new details on how the administration would implement plans over the coming decade to spend $4.5 trillion and increase taxes.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



WASHINGTON—The White House is expected to release President Biden's first budget proposal Friday, offering new details on how the administration would implement plans over the coming decade to spend $4.5 trillion and increase taxes.

The president is proposing a $6 trillion budget for fiscal year 2022, which begins Oct. 1, according to people familiar with the plans. That includes $1.52 trillion in discretionary spending for the military and domestic programs, including more funding for education, healthcare, research and renewable energy, White House officials said in April.

The budget will lay out how the president's plans for spending over the next decade on infrastructure and social programs, such as paid family leave and universal preschool, will affect federal debt and deficits. Under the proposal, debt as a percentage of annual gross domestic product would within a few years exceed the level at the end of World War II and climb to 117% of GDP by the end of 2031, according to people familiar with the matter. That would be up from about 100% this year.

Administration officials have said that their proposals, known as the American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan, would add to deficits over the next decade but that higher spending would eventually be offset by revenue from tax increases on wealthy individuals and corporations.

The president's budget proposal serves as a fiscal blueprint for the administration's policy priorities as well as signaling to Congress what the White House hopes to accomplish over the coming years. The proposal is generally seen as the opening salvo in a long process that leads to the government being funded, and lawmakers usually ignore the administration's request in favor of their own plans.

President Biden’s budget plan would raise discretionary spending in fiscal year 2022 by 8.4%, or $118 billion, from the $1.4 trillion authorized last year, excluding emergency measures to combat the   Covid-19 pandemic , according to a preliminary proposal released in April. Discretionary spending is the part of the budget that Congress shapes through the appropriations process.

Nondefense spending would rise 16% next fiscal year to $769.4 billion. Spending on defense would increase 1.7% to $753 billion—much less than what Republicans are likely to support but more than what has been called for by progressives, who pushed for cuts during the Trump administration.

The proposal fulfills some of Mr. Biden’s campaign promises, including more money for schools in high-poverty areas, cancer research and investments to address climate change.






Democrats in Congress welcomed the plan, saying it would provide money for long overdue investments after years of spending constraints. The details have drawn swift opposition from some Republican lawmakers, who have called it an intrusive expansion of federal power.

Republicans have criticized Mr. Biden for spending   $1.9 trillion on the coronavirus-relief package , with trillions more proposed for infrastructure, education and child care. They have said Covid-19 aid is causing problems by fueling inflation and potentially giving people receiving unemployment benefits an incentive not to return to work.

“This is just a tax-and-spend administration on everything,” said Sen. John Barrasso (R., Wyo.). “They’re disconnected from reality.”

For the White House, the budget proposal reflects a broader shift in economic thinking that focuses on keeping interest payments on government debt in check rather than eliminating deficits over the next decade.

While overall debt would rise to the highest level ever, the administration expects net interest costs to hover around 2% of GDP for the next decade, which it sees as a prudent threshold.

When the pandemic hit last spring, widespread business closures triggered millions of layoffs that weighed on federal revenue, and Congress eventually authorized roughly $6 trillion in additional spending to cushion the economy. That sent deficits soaring, pushing federal debt to $21 trillion, roughly 100% of annual economic output.






Administration officials see higher deficits in the short term as helping bolster long-term growth, through spending on new programs that boost the economy’s productive capacity. By the end of the decade, deficits start to shrink under the president’s plan.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    3 weeks ago

Crash the currency and the fragile ties, already so frayed, that hold us together and put an end to the best country that ever was or likely will be. 


Now to our readers:

Would you like to see anything added or subtracted from this plan?

Do you favor the Republican plan?

Or have we already spent too much?

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.1  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

1: Add 5 trillion to the plan.

2: What's the Republican plan?

3: No.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @1.1    3 weeks ago
2: What's the Republican plan?

You don't get much news where you are?

Here:

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.1.2  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Ah, they've gone from $568 Billion to $928 Billion ... what's the next stop? I'm smelling $1.3 Trillion.

"You don't get much news where you are?"

Just a local weekly, mostly about gang fights between pigeons and squirrels at the local park.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

That wasn't very nice toward one of our Canadian friends. Of course they get news up there.........( enjoy Hal and Lux LOL)

A member of  Canada's  Parliament has apologized after being filmed urinating on camera during a virtual legislative session, just over a month after he was caught naked in a meeting.

William Amos, 46, a member of Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party, revealed the incident in a statement on Thursday evening and confirmed that he would be stepping down from his committee positions, but not as a representative.

"Last night, while attending House of Commons proceedings virtually, in a non-public setting, I urinated without realizing I was on camera. I am deeply embarrassed by my actions and the distress they may have caused anybody who witnessed them," Amos wrote.
"While accidental and not visible to the public, this was completely unacceptable, and I apologize unreservedly. I will be stepping aside temporarily from my role as Parliamentary Secretary and from my committee duties so that I can seek assistance.

This crazy "I apologize for everything I have done or am about to do" world is getting ridiculous. LOL

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.4  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @1.1.2    3 weeks ago
I'm smelling $1.3 Trillion.

I'm smelling another reconciliation end-around, of which the democrats were grated 4. Then comes the stench of run-away inflation and economic stagnation.

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.1.5  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.4    3 weeks ago
Then comes the stench of run-away inflation and economic stagnation.

I suppose that could happen but over the years I have learned not to make predictions, history is a transgender dominatrix.

 
 
 
Hallux
Freshman Principal
1.1.6  Hallux  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.3    3 weeks ago

Hey, we don't make just anyone Parliamentary Secretary for Science.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.1.7  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    3 weeks ago

Stop being so disingenous Vic....That plan came out yesterday 27MAY21, and would have never been generated at all if the current administration wasn't pushing infrastructure.

BTW... As a comparison..Seen anything of a healthcare proposal from the GOP in the last 5 years?   Oh, that's right they don't have one.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.1.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  FLYNAVY1 @1.1.7    3 weeks ago

Why the deflection and/or whataboutism? You're usually better than that.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.2  Gordy327  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 weeks ago

So how do you propose funding programs that will actually help this country, like infrastructure and education? 

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
Professor Expert
1.2.1  FLYNAVY1  replied to  Gordy327 @1.2    3 weeks ago

Vic, like all party first conservatives has no interest in helping America.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.2.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Gordy327 @1.2    3 weeks ago

How about we cut foreign aid in half or more? Oh wait, It was the previous administration that wanted to head down that path and it is taboo as hell............SMMFH

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Gordy327  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.2.2    3 weeks ago

I'm for cutting foreign aid. As well as some military expenditures overseas. We should use our money to take care of our own house first.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
1.2.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Gordy327 @1.2.3    3 weeks ago

Thoughts and comments like that just may get your Democrat/Progressive membership card pulled as the last guy that thought that way got vilified to no end..................but I like the way you think.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
1.2.5  Ender  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.2.4    3 weeks ago

I am for cutting foreign aid as well. It is ridiculous that we give almost every country in the world billions of dollars.

Not everything is a partisan thing.

Also, I only remember donald wanting to cut aid to countries that refused to do something for him.

 
 
 
Gordy327
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Gordy327  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.2.4    3 weeks ago

I'm not a democrat. But political affiliation is irrelevant. It's about what is best and most practical for the nation. Unfortunately, many politicians and partisans do not seem to care about that. Or at least not look at the big picture.

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Masters Expert
2  Greg Jones    3 weeks ago

And they expect to pay for all this by taxing corporations and the "rich"?   jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

Holy Venezuela!

 
 
 
pat wilson
Professor Guide
2.1  pat wilson  replied to  Greg Jones @2    3 weeks ago

If all the taxes that are due were actually paid the budget would be flush with cash.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Greg Jones @2    3 weeks ago

I am in principle against continued borrowing and aggressive taxation.  

That said, this is entirely unrelated to what took place in Venezuela.   Until you see the US government expropriate private property (i.e. take over corporations, etc.) and attempt to run a command economy, Venezuela is a truly stupid comparison.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
2.2.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @2.2    3 weeks ago
Venezuela is a truly stupid comparison.

Everything, no matter how big or small, credible or outlandish, right or wrong, has a beginning. All under the guise of "We know what's best for you". That sound familiar?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.1    3 weeks ago

With that logic one could equate anything.   How would you react if someone used your reasoning to deem Trump the next Hitler?    I bet you would dismiss that as ridiculous, partisan bias.   Rightly so.

So why would you give this (extremely weak) support to Greg's stupid comparison of the USA to Venezuela?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
2.2.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.2    3 weeks ago

Same reason you would even think of comparing Trump to Hitler. It isn't out of the realm of possibility. Nothing is........unless met with extreme resistance. Which in each of the scenarios put forward, one would vehemently hope such resistance would materialize.

Ever hear of the frog in the pot of water on the stove ?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.4  TᵢG  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.2.3    3 weeks ago

Right, almost anything is possible.   But if you go to the extreme then you have no grounding in reality.    Rational minds necessarily deal with what is likely, not simply what is possible.

 
 
 
GregTx
Sophomore Silent
2.2.5  GregTx  replied to  TᵢG @2.2.4    3 weeks ago

Those who only deal with what they consider the likely outcomes and discount the possible outcomes are short-sighted.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.2.6  TᵢG  replied to  GregTx @2.2.5    3 weeks ago

There are infinite possibilities.   It is impossible to deal with all of them.   Rational, practical minds therefore engage in an analysis and narrow the infinite possibilities down to those possibilities that are more likely to occur.

Simply stated, rational minds do indeed deal with possible outcomes, but they focus on those that are more likely out of practical necessity.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3  TᵢG    3 weeks ago
The budget will lay out how the president's plans for spending over the next decade on infrastructure and social programs, such as paid family leave and universal preschool, will affect federal debt and deficits. Under the proposal, debt as a percentage of annual gross domestic product would within a few years exceed the level at the end of World War II and climb to 117% of GDP by the end of 2031, according to people familiar with the matter. That would be up from about 100% this year.

I would prefer Biden focus on pure infrastructure.   That means physical structures such as bridges, roads, rails, communications, power, renewable energy, etc.   And even then keep the spending well-controlled and graduated.   It is a never-ending cycle of politicians passing legislation for (sometimes) very good goals only to end up with waste and corruption siphoning off funds.

If Biden could actually demonstrate effective government initiatives that would be valuable.   Focus on enabling our nation to continue to grow its economy and operate efficiently and responsibly.    But keep the spending modest and well-controlled.   In a sense, attempt to run this as a business which is forced to work within limited resources instead of a political machine that can suck in whatever resources it desires and suffer no short-term consequences.

Also, what I described would likely have popular support.   A way for Biden to help fulfill his promise of being PotUS for all.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.1  Ender  replied to  TᵢG @3    3 weeks ago

Yeah if the money could go straight to projects instead of being manipulated along the line and siphoned off before it gets to where it needs to go.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Masters Quiet
3.2  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @3    3 weeks ago
 It is a never-ending cycle of politicians passing legislation for (sometimes) very good goals only to end up with waste and corruption siphoning off funds.

At 6 Trillion dollars Democrats must figure that there is enough money to overcome the waste & placate the corruption; and still have some of the money be used for it's intended purposes.

If Biden could actually demonstrate effective government initiatives that would be valuable. ocus on enabling our nation to continue to grow its economy and operate efficiently and responsibly.    But keep the spending modest and well-controlled.   In a sense, attempt to run this as a business which is forced to work within limited resources instead of a political machine that can suck in whatever resources it desires and suffer no short-term consequences.

Wasn't Biden put in charge 2009 Stimulus Package? Weren't those "shovel ready jobs" not so shovel ready? Not too much waste and corruption there./S Joe is the typical Establishment politician. Don't expect him to change just because he is president now.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.2.1  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @3.2    3 weeks ago

My hope (just a hope) was that Biden would used his presidency to cool down the nation and engage in domestic initiatives that benefit everyone and are generally seen as good (true infrastructure is a fine example).    While I am not surprised that there is a big push to cram as many D desires as possible while in control, I am disappointed that we seem to be still politics as usual with no concern (only lip service) for fiscal responsibility.

Our system is damaged and I see no hints of a correction.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
3.2.2  Ender  replied to  TᵢG @3.2.1    3 weeks ago

They cut taxes and increase spending.

I won't get into that but the cutting of taxes was a big mistake.

The government should finance this but I do agree with you that it should be more targeted and not include everything under the sun and handing over wads of cash with no outcome.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
4  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

It's amusing to consider what the left's response would have been if Trump proposed something this reckless.  In 2018, The NYT headline attacked Trump's 4 trillion dollar budget proposal for 2019 for adding 7 trillion to the debt. Three years later, Biden's proposal to add 13 trillion to the debt, is lauded by the same newspaper as "making America more competitive". 

You can only laugh.  

But Biden's boondoggle brings up a point.  Why do we have taxes at all? Clearly, there's no relationship between what we spend and what we take in. Why pretend there is? If debt deficits don't matter since we can just print money , as some progressives claim, than why collect taxes?

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4    3 weeks ago

If I remember correctly, 'the left' wanted donald to propose an infrastructure bill.

He never did.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
4.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ender @4.1    3 weeks ago

Never say never....................

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1.2  Ender  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

I can and will as he still never came out with a bill.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Junior Expert
4.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ender @4.1.2    3 weeks ago

Presidents suggest and make proposals. Congress must introduce bills based on said proposals. If you read the story, it was the GOP who, in their tight assed purse string clinging way, opposed it.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1.4  Ender  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @4.1.3    3 weeks ago

And donald didn't really push it as we all know he can get his way when he wants.

The gop is only tight with the purse stings when it is not their proposal.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Guide
4.1.5  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @4.1.4    3 weeks ago
And donald didn't really push it as we all know he can get his way when he wants

Do you imagine Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi worked for Donald Trump? 

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
4.1.6  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.5    3 weeks ago

What does that have to do with it? They came up with their own bill.

Donald still came up short.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Ronin2
Hallux
JBB


46 visitors