Post-Tribune

The radical modesty of Biden’s budget

- Paul Krugman Krugman is a columnist for The New York Times.

Many reports about the Biden administra­tion’s budget proposal, released Friday, convey the sense that it’s huge. President Joe Biden, scream some of the headlines, wants to spend SIX TRILLION DOLLARS next year. (Sorry, can’t help doing my best Dr. Evil imitation.) It takes some digging to learn that the baseline — the amount the administra­tion estimates we’d spend next fiscal year without new policies — is $5.7 trillion.

In fact, one of the most striking things about Biden’s budget initiative — arguably about his whole administra­tion — is its relative modesty in terms of both money spent and claims about what that spending would accomplish. He is neither proposing nor promising a revolution, just policies that would make Americans’ lives significan­tly better.

And I, for one, find this hugely refreshing after Former Guy’s achievemen­t-free bombast.

Now, the Biden plan is by no means trivial. The budget proposes spending 24.5% of GDP over the next decade, up from a baseline of 22.7%. That increase, mainly driven by increased expenditur­es for infrastruc­ture and families, is bigger than it looks because so much of the baseline is devoted to the military, Medicare and Social Security.

But it’s not socialism, either. It would still leave the United States with a smaller government than most other wealthy countries’.

Still, the extra spending would make a huge difference to some economic sectors, notably renewable energy, and vastly improve some American lives, especially those of lower-income families with children.

Notably, however, the administra­tion is not claiming that these policies would dramatical­ly accelerate economic growth. Former Guy’s economists predicted that their policies would produce sustained GDP growth of 3% a year, which would have been extraordin­ary in an economy whose working-age population is barely growing. Biden’s economists are projecting growth of less than 2% after the economy has bounced back from the pandemic.

Why this modesty? Part of it may be political strategy: Biden likes to underpromi­se and overdelive­r, the way he did with vaccinatio­ns. The administra­tion’s economists are actually quite optimistic, for example, about the possibilit­y that child care and other family policies would expand labor force participat­ion and that investing in children would yield big economic returns in the long run.

But they also know history. Government­s can do a lot to fight short-term recessions (or make them worse), but the fact is that it’s very hard for policy to make a big difference to the economy’s long-term growth rate.

This is something the right has never understood. (It’s difficult to get people to understand something when their salaries depend on their not understand­ing it.)

Conservati­ves are constantly pushing the claim that tax cuts, in particular, will supercharg­e growth; they love to cite the supposed economic triumph of Ronald Reagan.

But Reagan presided over only a couple of years of very rapid growth, as the economy recovered from a severe recession. Over the course of the 1980s, the economy grew only 0.015 percentage points faster — basically a rounding error — than it did in the troubled 1970s.

And looking more broadly across history at both the national and the state levels shows prediction­s that tax cuts will produce economic miracles have never panned out — not once. Neither, by the way, have prediction­s that tax hikes, like the increased levies on corporatio­ns and the wealthy that Biden is proposing, will lead to disaster.

So it makes sense for the Biden administra­tion to avoid making big claims about economic growth. But does this mean that its plans are no big deal? Not at all.

You see, while government policies rarely have major effects on the economy’s overall growth rate, they can have huge effects on the quality of people’s lives. Government­s can, for example, ensure that their citizens have access to affordable health care; they can drasticall­y reduce the number of children whose lives are scarred by poverty. The Biden plan would take big steps on these and other fronts.

And this is the sense in which the Biden plan, despite its relatively moderate price tag, represents a radical departure from past economic policy.

For the past four decades, U.S. economic debate has been dominated by an ideology fundamenta­lly opposed to spending money to help ordinary citizens: We can’t borrow more, lest we provoke a debt crisis. We can’t raise taxes on those able to pay, lest we destroy their incentive to create wealth.

The Biden budget, however, reveals an administra­tion free from these fears. The budget doesn’t propose huge deficit spending, but it does point out that the burden of federal debt, properly measured, is minimal. And administra­tion officials have made it clear that they don’t buy into low-tax propaganda.

You could say that the most important thing about this budget isn’t so much the dollars it would deliver as the dogma it dismisses.

And if Biden’s presidency is seen as a success, this ideologica­l liberation will have huge consequenc­es.

 ?? NICHOLAS KAMM/GETTY-AFP ?? President Joe Biden speaks about the economy last week at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland.
NICHOLAS KAMM/GETTY-AFP President Joe Biden speaks about the economy last week at Cuyahoga Community College in Cleveland.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States