Great post, although not all deficits are bad, and regulating spending on that premise leads to insufficient spending. Deficit spending, done carefully, is usually good. See The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton. She's an MMT advocate, so maybe on the radical side, but even MMT skeptics like Paul Krugman and Larry Summers agree that deficit spending is often just the ticket to energize the economy. After all, it follows from Keynes. No?
I think all of my commentary for the past few weeks has been based on the idea that Republicans were trying to slow spending to hurt the economy and Biden. So I think we are aligned here.
Simon - thanks for your quick and considerate reply. We are mostly aligned, but I think we're not QUITE aligned, based on your "Democrats = growth, lower deficits, American progress; Republicans = recession, higher deficits, American decline." To me this implies that lowering deficits is a good, a core premise in Deficit Myth thinking. When you have a sovereign currency, deficits are not a problem although reckless spending is--that is, spending on the wrong stuff and/or creating inflation. That deficit spending works is shown by the "deficit" itself--it keeps growing while the economy keeps growing. If deficit spending was going to break the banks, it would already have happened, despite dire howls about the dangers of the national debt going back to the 1980s.
Federal spending goes out into the real economy, which is where taxpayers get their payoff. Looked at from the viewpoint of the real economy, deficits are a SURPLUS. I'm not sure MMT has got everything right, but looking at spending from the MMT perspective turns the current deficit debate inside out. "Democrats = growth, American progress" is something I'm more comfortable with. Leave out deficits entirely. OK, leaving it in is a selling point in the short run, but asks for trouble in the long run.
Emergencies happen. COVID happened. Solutions require running up deficits. Fear of deficits capped spending and crippled the economy in 2009-2010. Spending per se is not the issue, what it's spent ON is the issue--that's where Dems have it all over the other side. I'm not trying to be contrary for the sake of argument: I sincerely believe that talking about the size of the deficit is, in the long run, risky. Historically, balanced federal budgets are correlated with recessions/depressions--whether that correlation means causation is up for debate, but I doubt the reverse is true.
Thanks for all your good work--do you sleep?--and for energizing Democrats in this critical area.
Hi Mark, I appreciate your analysis, and I agree in principle. But my own take is that it’s a little too nuanced to make an effective soundbite out of. Like you, I don’t think deficit spending is the biggest problem in the world, and done properly, it can actually be quite useful.
However, it’s demonstrably true that Democrats have consistently run lower deficits than Republicans in the modern era, and at the same time have brought far better economic results. It’s an easy contrast to make, an easy soundbite to use, and a good counter to the right’s complete and total hypocritical bullshit about pretending to care about deficits when they obviously don’t.
They run much higher structural deficits, because of where their deficits come from, which is insufficiently bringing in revenue from the people who have benefited most from being Americans. Democrats run lower deficits with a better return on investment, because of where their deficit spending comes from…investing more in those who will spend their financial gains out into the economy, and in opportunities for new and better employment for every day Americans.
But as a matter of messaging, I still think it’s easier to point out the simple contrast that Democrats bring about better results with lower deficits. We only get a short bite of the apple with persuadable low information voters…so I see where Simon is coming from with his talking points. But I also enjoy the nuance of what you’re saying…
What are your thoughts on how we could condense your argument into a good contrasting talking point to show the difference between Rs & Ds? Thanks!
Thanks for your thoughts! I'm immersed in work right now but will try to reply Thursday at more length when my head gets above water. I take your point about soundbites and messaging seriously, but no I haven't come up with a condensation=soundbite despite having thought about it quite a lot, for years actually, ever since I read The Deficit Myth. It's a problem when you have to convey a new paradigm (new to most people) while simultaneously making an argument based on the paradigm before it has taken hold. This is where MMT falls flat--they don't have a soundbite that will work with the public either. More later, cheers, Mark
- thanks again for your nudge on messaging and soundbites -
I'll start with something simple that popped into my head recently: if we want to have a Holy Trinity of soundbites favoring Democrats, maybe the way to go is "Democrats = growth, better jobs, American progress" to avoid mention of deficits? That might not be the best alternative (possibly "more jobs" instead might work? or "more and better jobs?" (although the later has the liability of being 2 more words)). Unfortunately, Americans seem not to have noticed that under Biden we've demonstrably been getting more and better jobs, because the twin bugaboo of "inflation!" and "imminent recession " has drowned it out. (Don't need to ask who is feeding the bugaboo.)
Why do I keep harping on this point? It's because EVEN TO MENTION deficits touches on what has--as a result of powerful Republican propaganda--become a quasi-religious set of beliefs: more government spending is a waste, we individually should have choices about how our money is spent which any taxation deprives us of, and the private sector is more efficient, therefore we get more bang for our personal buck by putting money into the private sector. Better to spend money on Halloween costumes for pets (half a billion dollars in 2019) than on public schools, because the former is by choice, the latter is compulsory.
OK, the Halloween costumes vs schools is hyperbole, but it illustrates a tendency in what Americans view as waste and value. Charitable Giving is a better example--"it's my money, I get to say what I spend it on. I know better than bureaucrats!"
"Choice" and "freedom" are key--an example being polls and voting initiatives demonstrating that much of the pushback against harsh anti-abortion laws comes out of the bedrock belief that the more individual choice, the better. Even the specter of "child murder" in places like Kansas cannot prevail against it. That belief is why the charge of "socialism" against the Left is so effective with Independents--most Americans don't really understand what socialism is, but they equate it with Big Government, meaning taking away individual choice, in particular taking away your money. This is why (my hunch as to WHY, although I don't have hard data to back it up) poll after poll shows Americans believe that "Republicans are better on the economy." Every time I hear this I (and probably you) feel like screaming, "why the hell do they believe that?!!" (Sometimes I do literally scream, in the privacy of my home or car.) But they do, and factual evidence alone seems incapable of countering it. Republican propagandists know so well that effective messaging doesn't need to bother with inconvenient facts, it's emotion that sways thinking.
Therefore, it doesn't matter that Democrats are better on federal deficits. Just the word "deficits" pushes a button rooted in the set of beliefs I mentioned above. This is how the mostly unconscious chain of thought goes: "deficits" (big or small doesn't matter, any deficit is bad) -> government spending (good or bad doesn't matter) -> Big Government -> taxes -> limits on choice -> lack of freedom.
(Thus many of the people who support abortion rights also deplore large government spending (look at Kansas)--both part of the Freedom of Choice package.)
Through constant repetition, this chain of thought has become automatic for anyone right of center in the U.S., which probably includes a majority of Americans, at least adults over 30. (Which is why outreach to young people is so important; since polls indicate they don't freak out over "socialism.")
For how this has historically come about, I recommend the book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, "The Big Myth - How American Business taught us to loathe government and love the free market." The authors go back into the 19th Century origins to describe the evolution of that Big Myth, the Big Myth that got a big boost in the era of Reagan, Grover Norquist, Newt Gingrich, et al., and is now so pervasive, and so bewildering to the Left.
It's a tall order to uproot or even to weaken this set of beliefs (just ask Stephanie Kelton) . I recommend, if we can't make the case that deficit spending is very often beneficial (at least if you have a fiat currency), start by just dropping the word altogether and find a substitute.
Sorry I don't have a better soundbite idea, but it's worth thinking about.
Fared Zakaria’s breakdown of the USA’s successes is a very positive message pushing back on the Trump MAGA attack on our country and its values, norms and rule of law. We, as a country, need to do more to ensure equal treatment under the law and educate our citizens about our civics, constitutional rights, and true history, all of which is possible with us voters voting in lawmakers who deal in reality and not in ridiculous lies and antiAmerican commitment to party over country.🇺🇸
First, just to clarify - the term electorate is used here to mean those who voted, correct? Sometimes it’s used to indicate all those eligible to vote, not just those who voted. More significantly, I have been meaning to highlight to this group the work of Movement Voter Project (www.movement.vote) and this post provides the perfect moment. MVP identifies, vets, supports and collaborates with over 400 grassroots groups in swing states and districts, specifically focussing getting out the vote in communities of young people and communities of color. MVP has worked with many groups you’ve probably heard of (like Black Voters Matter and New Georgia Project, both of which were instrumental in the three very close wins in the 2021 and 2022 Georgia Senate runoffs) and many, many groups you haven’t (like the dozens of groups in WI which helped produce the 55+ win in the recent WI Supreme Court election). All of these groups are doing the hard work on the ground right now connecting with potential voters and building the infrastructure to mobilize POC and young people for massive voter turnout in 2024. I’d be happy to speak about MVP with anyone who is interested. MVP’s mission and work go hand in hand with what we are working towards in this space with you!
While I certainly agree with this shorthand "Democrats = growth, lower deficits, American progress vs. Republicans = recession, higher deficits, American decline" -- based on research regarding messaging that is affective with BOTH base Dem voters and persuadable voters, a contrast that emphasizes our shared values could be much more effective:
Dems deliver jobs, progress & freedoms
MAGA Repubs bring recessions, decline & fascism
When we only talk about the "economy" in abstract terms, vs in terms of working families and individual opportunities and success, we actually invoke the traditional Republican brand/framing, rather than educating voters on why we are different and better for everyday Americans. Most importantly, clawing back the ground we've ceded to Repubs, must cover not only how Dems are better for Americans' pocketbooks, but also how Dems are better at protecting our shared, core value of "freedom."
That’s a very interesting point… I find that anecdotally, lower information voters have a tendency to react poorly in my own sphere of influence to the word fascism… It’s like they can’t quite accept that we’re in that much trouble. But they do understand that the Republicans are less interested in freedom and rights than the Democrats because of the Dobbs decision… So something like “growth, lower deficits, freedom and rights“ versus “recession, higher deficits, rolling back rights and freedoms“ might also get the job done. It’s difficult to talk about MAGA without sounding like an alarmist to a low information voter. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks for the great, Natalie!
I think it depends a bit on your audience—but we SHOULD be raising the alarm against fascism.
A party that is taking away our freedom to vote, our freedom to decide if, when or how to start/grow a family, our freedom to love who we love, be who we are, and our freedom to thrive and succeed, by putting the profits of a wealthy, well-connected few over the rights of all working Americans, regardless of our race, background or zipcode—is fascist.
But if you’re concerned about political literacy…
“Dems deliver jobs, progress & freedoms”
“MAGA Repubs bring recessions, decline & fear”
It’s important to not only lead with our values, but to call out their villainy, too.
Am I missing something about the Electorate vs. Population charts? Where is the key to the colors? What does it mean, maybe I need more tea. Is there text talking about it somewhere?
Wanna feel good about Joe and the job he’s doing? Read this awesome tweet thread by Simon’s friend and founder of #DeepStateRadio David Rothkopf.....this will hit you like hot cocoa on a cold night 😎😁👍
Dang Steve!!!!! Mic drop!!!!! Incredible thread! Simon link to this on your main or have another interview with David soon. Super duper inspiring! This momentum is going to grow. So thankful for Hopium.
Steve, no doubt you saw this, but to others Laurence MSNBC breaks down Biden’s Sage strategy on debt legislation. Spread this good news family!
Great post, although not all deficits are bad, and regulating spending on that premise leads to insufficient spending. Deficit spending, done carefully, is usually good. See The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton. She's an MMT advocate, so maybe on the radical side, but even MMT skeptics like Paul Krugman and Larry Summers agree that deficit spending is often just the ticket to energize the economy. After all, it follows from Keynes. No?
I think all of my commentary for the past few weeks has been based on the idea that Republicans were trying to slow spending to hurt the economy and Biden. So I think we are aligned here.
Simon - thanks for your quick and considerate reply. We are mostly aligned, but I think we're not QUITE aligned, based on your "Democrats = growth, lower deficits, American progress; Republicans = recession, higher deficits, American decline." To me this implies that lowering deficits is a good, a core premise in Deficit Myth thinking. When you have a sovereign currency, deficits are not a problem although reckless spending is--that is, spending on the wrong stuff and/or creating inflation. That deficit spending works is shown by the "deficit" itself--it keeps growing while the economy keeps growing. If deficit spending was going to break the banks, it would already have happened, despite dire howls about the dangers of the national debt going back to the 1980s.
Federal spending goes out into the real economy, which is where taxpayers get their payoff. Looked at from the viewpoint of the real economy, deficits are a SURPLUS. I'm not sure MMT has got everything right, but looking at spending from the MMT perspective turns the current deficit debate inside out. "Democrats = growth, American progress" is something I'm more comfortable with. Leave out deficits entirely. OK, leaving it in is a selling point in the short run, but asks for trouble in the long run.
Emergencies happen. COVID happened. Solutions require running up deficits. Fear of deficits capped spending and crippled the economy in 2009-2010. Spending per se is not the issue, what it's spent ON is the issue--that's where Dems have it all over the other side. I'm not trying to be contrary for the sake of argument: I sincerely believe that talking about the size of the deficit is, in the long run, risky. Historically, balanced federal budgets are correlated with recessions/depressions--whether that correlation means causation is up for debate, but I doubt the reverse is true.
Thanks for all your good work--do you sleep?--and for energizing Democrats in this critical area.
Hi Mark, I appreciate your analysis, and I agree in principle. But my own take is that it’s a little too nuanced to make an effective soundbite out of. Like you, I don’t think deficit spending is the biggest problem in the world, and done properly, it can actually be quite useful.
However, it’s demonstrably true that Democrats have consistently run lower deficits than Republicans in the modern era, and at the same time have brought far better economic results. It’s an easy contrast to make, an easy soundbite to use, and a good counter to the right’s complete and total hypocritical bullshit about pretending to care about deficits when they obviously don’t.
They run much higher structural deficits, because of where their deficits come from, which is insufficiently bringing in revenue from the people who have benefited most from being Americans. Democrats run lower deficits with a better return on investment, because of where their deficit spending comes from…investing more in those who will spend their financial gains out into the economy, and in opportunities for new and better employment for every day Americans.
But as a matter of messaging, I still think it’s easier to point out the simple contrast that Democrats bring about better results with lower deficits. We only get a short bite of the apple with persuadable low information voters…so I see where Simon is coming from with his talking points. But I also enjoy the nuance of what you’re saying…
What are your thoughts on how we could condense your argument into a good contrasting talking point to show the difference between Rs & Ds? Thanks!
PianoManSteve -
Thanks for your thoughts! I'm immersed in work right now but will try to reply Thursday at more length when my head gets above water. I take your point about soundbites and messaging seriously, but no I haven't come up with a condensation=soundbite despite having thought about it quite a lot, for years actually, ever since I read The Deficit Myth. It's a problem when you have to convey a new paradigm (new to most people) while simultaneously making an argument based on the paradigm before it has taken hold. This is where MMT falls flat--they don't have a soundbite that will work with the public either. More later, cheers, Mark
Hi again PianoManSteve, I'm back again --
- thanks again for your nudge on messaging and soundbites -
I'll start with something simple that popped into my head recently: if we want to have a Holy Trinity of soundbites favoring Democrats, maybe the way to go is "Democrats = growth, better jobs, American progress" to avoid mention of deficits? That might not be the best alternative (possibly "more jobs" instead might work? or "more and better jobs?" (although the later has the liability of being 2 more words)). Unfortunately, Americans seem not to have noticed that under Biden we've demonstrably been getting more and better jobs, because the twin bugaboo of "inflation!" and "imminent recession " has drowned it out. (Don't need to ask who is feeding the bugaboo.)
Why do I keep harping on this point? It's because EVEN TO MENTION deficits touches on what has--as a result of powerful Republican propaganda--become a quasi-religious set of beliefs: more government spending is a waste, we individually should have choices about how our money is spent which any taxation deprives us of, and the private sector is more efficient, therefore we get more bang for our personal buck by putting money into the private sector. Better to spend money on Halloween costumes for pets (half a billion dollars in 2019) than on public schools, because the former is by choice, the latter is compulsory.
OK, the Halloween costumes vs schools is hyperbole, but it illustrates a tendency in what Americans view as waste and value. Charitable Giving is a better example--"it's my money, I get to say what I spend it on. I know better than bureaucrats!"
"Choice" and "freedom" are key--an example being polls and voting initiatives demonstrating that much of the pushback against harsh anti-abortion laws comes out of the bedrock belief that the more individual choice, the better. Even the specter of "child murder" in places like Kansas cannot prevail against it. That belief is why the charge of "socialism" against the Left is so effective with Independents--most Americans don't really understand what socialism is, but they equate it with Big Government, meaning taking away individual choice, in particular taking away your money. This is why (my hunch as to WHY, although I don't have hard data to back it up) poll after poll shows Americans believe that "Republicans are better on the economy." Every time I hear this I (and probably you) feel like screaming, "why the hell do they believe that?!!" (Sometimes I do literally scream, in the privacy of my home or car.) But they do, and factual evidence alone seems incapable of countering it. Republican propagandists know so well that effective messaging doesn't need to bother with inconvenient facts, it's emotion that sways thinking.
Therefore, it doesn't matter that Democrats are better on federal deficits. Just the word "deficits" pushes a button rooted in the set of beliefs I mentioned above. This is how the mostly unconscious chain of thought goes: "deficits" (big or small doesn't matter, any deficit is bad) -> government spending (good or bad doesn't matter) -> Big Government -> taxes -> limits on choice -> lack of freedom.
(Thus many of the people who support abortion rights also deplore large government spending (look at Kansas)--both part of the Freedom of Choice package.)
Through constant repetition, this chain of thought has become automatic for anyone right of center in the U.S., which probably includes a majority of Americans, at least adults over 30. (Which is why outreach to young people is so important; since polls indicate they don't freak out over "socialism.")
For how this has historically come about, I recommend the book by Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, "The Big Myth - How American Business taught us to loathe government and love the free market." The authors go back into the 19th Century origins to describe the evolution of that Big Myth, the Big Myth that got a big boost in the era of Reagan, Grover Norquist, Newt Gingrich, et al., and is now so pervasive, and so bewildering to the Left.
It's a tall order to uproot or even to weaken this set of beliefs (just ask Stephanie Kelton) . I recommend, if we can't make the case that deficit spending is very often beneficial (at least if you have a fiat currency), start by just dropping the word altogether and find a substitute.
Sorry I don't have a better soundbite idea, but it's worth thinking about.
Cheers, Mark
I appreciate what you’re doing. Keep it coming 😊
Fared Zakaria’s breakdown of the USA’s successes is a very positive message pushing back on the Trump MAGA attack on our country and its values, norms and rule of law. We, as a country, need to do more to ensure equal treatment under the law and educate our citizens about our civics, constitutional rights, and true history, all of which is possible with us voters voting in lawmakers who deal in reality and not in ridiculous lies and antiAmerican commitment to party over country.🇺🇸
First, just to clarify - the term electorate is used here to mean those who voted, correct? Sometimes it’s used to indicate all those eligible to vote, not just those who voted. More significantly, I have been meaning to highlight to this group the work of Movement Voter Project (www.movement.vote) and this post provides the perfect moment. MVP identifies, vets, supports and collaborates with over 400 grassroots groups in swing states and districts, specifically focussing getting out the vote in communities of young people and communities of color. MVP has worked with many groups you’ve probably heard of (like Black Voters Matter and New Georgia Project, both of which were instrumental in the three very close wins in the 2021 and 2022 Georgia Senate runoffs) and many, many groups you haven’t (like the dozens of groups in WI which helped produce the 55+ win in the recent WI Supreme Court election). All of these groups are doing the hard work on the ground right now connecting with potential voters and building the infrastructure to mobilize POC and young people for massive voter turnout in 2024. I’d be happy to speak about MVP with anyone who is interested. MVP’s mission and work go hand in hand with what we are working towards in this space with you!
While I certainly agree with this shorthand "Democrats = growth, lower deficits, American progress vs. Republicans = recession, higher deficits, American decline" -- based on research regarding messaging that is affective with BOTH base Dem voters and persuadable voters, a contrast that emphasizes our shared values could be much more effective:
Dems deliver jobs, progress & freedoms
MAGA Repubs bring recessions, decline & fascism
When we only talk about the "economy" in abstract terms, vs in terms of working families and individual opportunities and success, we actually invoke the traditional Republican brand/framing, rather than educating voters on why we are different and better for everyday Americans. Most importantly, clawing back the ground we've ceded to Repubs, must cover not only how Dems are better for Americans' pocketbooks, but also how Dems are better at protecting our shared, core value of "freedom."
That’s a very interesting point… I find that anecdotally, lower information voters have a tendency to react poorly in my own sphere of influence to the word fascism… It’s like they can’t quite accept that we’re in that much trouble. But they do understand that the Republicans are less interested in freedom and rights than the Democrats because of the Dobbs decision… So something like “growth, lower deficits, freedom and rights“ versus “recession, higher deficits, rolling back rights and freedoms“ might also get the job done. It’s difficult to talk about MAGA without sounding like an alarmist to a low information voter. What are your thoughts on this? Thanks for the great, Natalie!
Hi Steve,
I think it depends a bit on your audience—but we SHOULD be raising the alarm against fascism.
A party that is taking away our freedom to vote, our freedom to decide if, when or how to start/grow a family, our freedom to love who we love, be who we are, and our freedom to thrive and succeed, by putting the profits of a wealthy, well-connected few over the rights of all working Americans, regardless of our race, background or zipcode—is fascist.
But if you’re concerned about political literacy…
“Dems deliver jobs, progress & freedoms”
“MAGA Repubs bring recessions, decline & fear”
It’s important to not only lead with our values, but to call out their villainy, too.
Am I missing something about the Electorate vs. Population charts? Where is the key to the colors? What does it mean, maybe I need more tea. Is there text talking about it somewhere?
Anyone can put up a poll
Poll: MAGA GOP's Never Vote to Protest False Election Fraud Claims
Wanna feel good about Joe and the job he’s doing? Read this awesome tweet thread by Simon’s friend and founder of #DeepStateRadio David Rothkopf.....this will hit you like hot cocoa on a cold night 😎😁👍
https://twitter.com/djrothkopf/status/1663546412334972932?s=46
Dang Steve!!!!! Mic drop!!!!! Incredible thread! Simon link to this on your main or have another interview with David soon. Super duper inspiring! This momentum is going to grow. So thankful for Hopium.
Steve, no doubt you saw this, but to others Laurence MSNBC breaks down Biden’s Sage strategy on debt legislation. Spread this good news family!
https://youtu.be/MXP45GQGaSc
Loved that clip last night 😁