So today I ask why?
Apparently the $5 billion proposed to build a wall is more important than everything the federal government does. We have all sorts of problems. We have too many people in poverty. We have too many people with insufficient livelihoods. We have poor infrastructure, and we have terrorists killing people all over the planet. But who cares about doing something about all that? Let's shut down the government over a $5 billion wall.
Do I have that wrong?
Since I was in a playful mood this morning and had not yet ingested my first JD, I decided to do the little table below. The first column shows how much we plan to spend in fiscal year 2019 on major programs. The numbers are in billions of dollars. The second column shows how much we could spend on each of those items if we allocated the $5 billion to that category instead of a wall. The third column compares the second column to the first in percentage terms.
Notice that we plan to spend $4.4 trillion for all federal government programs in FY 2019. A reallocation of the $5 billion would not change that total. So the change is zero dollars and zero percent. But even if that total could go from $4,407 billion to $4,412 billion -- the percentage increase would be very close to zero. This indicates that the $5 billion is virtually nothing when you compare it to all government spending. Why has nothing become everything?
| Federal Government Spending USA FY 2019 | |||
| Billions of dollars | |||
| 2019 | 2019' | %Increase | |
| Healthcare | 1,225 | 1,230 | 0.41 |
| Pensions | 1,108 | 1,113 | 0.45 |
| Defense | 949 | 954 | 0.53 |
| Interest | 363 | 368 | 1.38 |
| Welfare | 348 | 353 | 1.44 |
| Education | 113 | 118 | 4.42 |
| Other | 110 | 115 | 4.55 |
| Transportation | 94 | 99 | 5.32 |
| General | 53 | 58 | 9.43 |
| Protection | 42 | 47 | 11.90 |
| Wall | 5 | 0 | na |
| Total | 4,407 | 4,407 | 0.00 |
Why ask, "Why?"?
ReplyDeleteWhy not ask why?
DeleteDear LSD. You get an A+ in Philosophy 101. Congrats . . go to the head of the wedge and pour yourself a JD.
ReplyDeleteThank you Professor Tuna. It's a little early for the JD but it must be noon somewhere.
DeleteThe absence of financial relevance does not render the issue irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteVery true Karl. I can't disagree. But this post is not only about the relevance of the issue. It is more about the approach of both sides to hold us all hostage over any issue. They are paid to come up with solutions. The solutions might not satisfy the base on either side and often are not satisfying. Democracy is not meant to be an all or none game. The table does enforce the idea of relevance and I guess I am guilty of thinking that a wall, at whatever cost, is not worth shutting down the government. There are better ways.
DeleteDemocracy is about compromise. It is and always will be such. I imagine a compromise will be reached. The sooner the better but that is in the hands of our elected officials...all of them.
ReplyDeleteThanks JCB. Sadly, I wonder about the capacity of our elected officials to settle on a compromise. They seem to revel in the combat.
DeleteDear LSD. If, as you say and as the chart indicates, the $5 billion is virtually nothing compared to all govomit spending let Donnie have his frigg’n wall and get on with it. But it’s everything to the Dimms—it’s their Booker/Spartacus moment and if they give in they will shurely dim their hopes for a regressive POTUS in ’20. The standoff vividly illustrates the Dimm’s Trump Derangement Syndrome and exposes in 3D living color their irrationality. Rather die on the bank of the river Sele as did Spartacus the Dimms are gunna die on the southern border with their canard that there is no border crisis: It will be precipitated by the arrival of the impending new caravan. Spartacus didn’t compromise and neither will the Dimms. Independent voters will see right through the idiocy of the Dimm’s democracy be damned stance.
ReplyDeleteWell said Brutus. Trouble is the other guys see it just the opposite. They moan, "Why doesn't Trump just give in on the wall?" It seems to me both sides are wrong. Neither want to take responsibility for defining the goals and implementing a useful but imperfect immigration policy.
DeleteDear LSD. The reports indicate it is not both sides but one side that’s intransigent. Pelosi offered a non-starter one dollar for the wall, no Dimms have offered anything to move the ball forward, and did not accept an invite yesterday for lunch at the WH for discussion. Rs, on the other hand, are reported working on stuff to offer—no reports on Dimms even from the left-wing-nut media.
DeleteMight be true might not. Not sure how any of us would know how much the Rs and Trump are willing to go. They want the wall. Pelosi does not. I don't believe either side when they accuse the other of not negotiating.
DeleteIts not about the money but the perception--or lies-- about border security. The Wharton grad was elected because of his wall promise. If he hadn't made it and was elected the 234 miles would be built. The Ds know this and are trying to prevent him from having it. So we are holding up the government because one group wants to hurt the other for an expenditure that is probably a waste of money....
ReplyDeleteWell said Mr Yachts.
DeleteThank you for putting the 5 billion in perspective. I believe that he could take money out of his petty cash and develop a series of commercials that would drive his argument a lot further. I would want a 60minutes like show of the men and women on border who, I think, know why they need a barrier of some sort in special places. To me it's more about results and the short distance wall might have benefits if sold properly. If it were a business would I build it?
ReplyDeleteAll very rational Bill. Unfortunately the folks in Washington are a long way from rational.
Delete