In the wake of the Great Recession of 2007-2009 and the ensuing federal stimulus efforts, no economic subject has drawn as much attention or attracted as much controversy as the national debt and federal and state budget deficits. This book clearly explains how and why governments borrow money, how and why they engage in deficit spending, and the short- and long-term effects such practices have on the economy. Even-handed and nonpartisan, this book allows readers to understand the actual economic mechanics at work beneath all the hype. As such, it is a welcome, calming corrective to a partisan debate that has obscured economic realities and muddled the effort to guarantee a sound economy for future generations of Americans.

The Budget Deficit and National Debt analyzes and attempts to better understand the problems associated with the debt and deficit. The theme of this book parallels the Miller Center's primary focus on governance and the presidency. The president is a key actor in submitting, approving, and administrating the budget. Therefore, the study of debt and deficit is in keeping with the Miller Center's focus on governance and the presidency. The book is divided into four sections. The first section discusses the debt and deficit from a variety of political perspectives and ideological approaches. Three contributors, representing different schools of thought and professional backgrounds, provide separate frameworks for considering the budget and deficit. The first section contrasts liberal, conservative, and independent views and compares the effects of the deficit on federal and local governments. The second section provides an overview of the origins and growth of the deficit and its effect on the U.S. economy. The authors outline interaction among and competition between economic and political forces operating in the United States, and they debate the merits of deficit reduction proposals. The third section examines the economic and political ramifications of the deficit, reviewing tactical and strategic errors and their consequences. The book concludes with a discussion of the political struggle over controlling the deficit and chronicles the ambitions and rivalries of two key political figures--Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich. Their dispute over the seven year balanced-budget plan had significant influence on the policies of debt and deficit.

A New York Times Bestseller The leading thinker and most visible public advocate of modern monetary theory -- the freshest and most important idea about economics in decades -- delivers a radically different, bold, new understanding for how to build a just and prosperous society. Stephanie Kelton's brilliant exploration of modern monetary theory (MMT) dramatically changes our understanding of how we can best deal with crucial issues ranging from poverty and inequality to creating jobs, expanding health care coverage, climate change, and building resilient infrastructure. Any ambitious proposal, however, inevitably runs into the buzz saw of how to find the money to pay for it, rooted in myths about deficits that are hobbling us as a country. Kelton busts through the myths that prevent us from taking action: that the federal government should budget like a household, that deficits will harm the next generation, crowd out private investment, and undermine long-term growth, and that entitlements are propelling us toward a grave fiscal crisis. MMT, as Kelton shows, shifts the terrain from narrow budgetary questions to one of broader economic and social benefits. With its important new ways of understanding money, taxes, and the critical role of deficit spending, MMT redefines how to responsibly use our resources so that we can maximize our potential as a society. MMT gives us the power to imagine a new politics and a new economy and move from a narrative of scarcity to one of opportunity.

Discussions and conversations about the U.S. federal budget are commonplace, filling living rooms, coffee shops, and talk radio. "Red Ink" offers an insightful, non-partisan explanation of the budget as a political document. The book examines the budget as well as discussing the current structure of the federal government.

In the United States, the size and composition of the federal budget is arguably the most important single issue of the 1990's, yet most debates and commentaries on the subject are largely uninformed. Virtually no one - whether government official, member of Congress, journalist, or taxpayer - seems to understand how the budget is put together and what it means. This is hardly surprising, since the budget has become extraordinarily complicated. The structure of the budget reform act of 1911 has been maintained, with the changes of additional reforms (1974, 1986, and 1990) piled on top of it, while virtually nothing has been discarded. Most people are distressed at the enormous size of the federal deficit and perplexed because highly touted plans and agreements to bring the deficit down result in an even higher deficit. Why does this happen? Why is there a growing deficit amid cries of underfunding? Why is there general agreement on a format that has proved so misleading? This book comprises a series of essays about the federal budget - how and why it has grown so large, why most "deficit-reduction" measures are either shams or predestined to fail, and why understanding budget issues is so difficult. The authors offer a new perspective, a microbudgeting approach, which requires examining in detail how the federal government makes its budget decisions. Macrobudgeting, which is concerned with totals rather than parts, has prevailed for more than a generation in both Democratic and Republican administrations; the deficit-reduction drives of the 1980's, for example, failed because the parts added up to more than the targeted totals. By contrast, microbudgeting breaks the budget down into its basic elements, carefully reviews the assumptions underlying each program or account, and critically examines the methods by which savings are computed. Using this approach, the authors demonstrate that it is possible to understand the budget process and to make informed decisions on issues of public policy. Individual essays focus on such topics as: the changing Congressional budget processes that have been critically important in contributing to the federal budget deficits that have persisted since World War II; the origins, uses, and abuses of budget baselines; and the myth of the budget reductions of the Reagan presidency.

Do deficits matter? Yes and no, says Daniel Shaviro in this political and economic study. Yes, because fiscal policy affects generational distribution, national saving, and the level of government spending. And no, because the deficit is an inaccurate measure with little economic content. This book provides an invaluable guide for anyone wanting to know exactly what is at stake for Americans in this ongoing debate. "[An] excellent, comprehensive, and illuminating book. Its analysis, deftly integrating considerations of economics, law, politics, and philosophy, brings the issues of 'balanced budgets,' national saving, and intergenerational equity out of the area of religious crusades and into an arena of reason. . . . A magnificent, judicious, and balanced treatment. It should be read and studied not just by specialists in fiscal policy but by all those in the economic and political community."—Robert Eisner, Journal of Economic Literature "Shaviro's history, economics, and political analysis are right on the mark. For all readers."—Library Journal