YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsFederal Deficits

Federal Deficits

February 24, 1992
I disagree that the cause of the recent record deficits lies in the Reagan tax cuts. These cuts released a record amount of investment and entrepreneurial activity that created millions of new jobs and one of the longest peacetime expansions in the history of this country. The true cause of the record increase in the deficit lies in the rapid growth of government spending over the past decade, particularly during the Bush Administration. In fact, the Gramm-Rudman Act was reducing the deficit and would have wiped it out if the President and Congress had not abrogated the agreement with the ill-conceived budget deal of 1990.
March 30, 1986
James Flanigan in his March 25 column says the call for an oil-import tax is to protect exploration by U.S. companies for new reserves. A carefully and fairly drafted tax on oil imports or on gasoline at the pump should be imposed without delay, but not merely to enable ongoing exploration by U.S. companies. The dozens of billions thus reaped, or a hefty part of it, should be directly applied toward reduction of the federal deficit. With oil and gasoline prices as low as they now are, the "hurt" to commercial and individual consumers from a substantial tax would be an expense which all could manage.
August 11, 1993
There is a popular misconception being promoted these days that entitlement spending is one of the reasons we have such large budget deficits ("Entitlements Haunt Congress' Budget Cutting," July 26). Leading the pack is Social Security. But it is not possible for Social Security to contribute to the national debt. The Social Security Trust Fund is solvent. It cannot be used by the government for anything other than as a source of borrowing. It should not even be included in the federal budget (but was put there in the 1980s to mask the size of the debt)
December 6, 1990 | From Times Wire Services
The weak economy and the mammoth costs of helping the savings and loan industry will soon push the federal deficit to records surpassing $300 billion per year, a congressional study said today. But by 1993, the newly enacted deficit-reduction law and an improving economy should begin shrinking the federal shortfall, the Congressional Budget Office said in a report presented to the House Budget Committee.
May 19, 1990
Granted, I'm not an economist, but I don't understand why lowering taxes, even capital gains taxes, is recommended as a way to increase revenues. I know the argument is that if we cut taxes, more people will sell their stocks, and there will be more revenue to tax. Wouldn't there also be more revenue to tax if the government announced that in two years the tax on capital gains would be increased to 35%? Everyone would rush to sell their stocks. I'm sick of all this regressive taxation.
Los Angeles Times Articles