As the US Congress approaches the expiration of the budget extension, facing a possible shut down of the federal government, the fight over exactly how much the budget should be cut is intensifying. With a plethora of newly elected Republicans (who now make up a majority of the House) insisting the budget be cut, instead of questioning whether the budget be cut, the issue has become by how much the budget must be cut, and where, exactly these cuts will come.
To help understand how the budget can be balanced, the New York Times has put together an excellent interactive graphic that allows you to balance the budget by cutting (or not) a variety of programs and/or raising taxes. It then allows you to see the effect of these changes on the budget gap for 2015 and 2030. For instance, by doing stereotypically liberal things like raising taxes and cutting Defense funds, I cured the deficit, with a predicted $52 billion surplus by 2030. While completely lacking nuance, I thought that the Times' interactive did increase my understanding of the budget, and what could be done to remedy the deficit.
To help understand how the budget can be balanced, the New York Times has put together an excellent interactive graphic that allows you to balance the budget by cutting (or not) a variety of programs and/or raising taxes. It then allows you to see the effect of these changes on the budget gap for 2015 and 2030. For instance, by doing stereotypically liberal things like raising taxes and cutting Defense funds, I cured the deficit, with a predicted $52 billion surplus by 2030. While completely lacking nuance, I thought that the Times' interactive did increase my understanding of the budget, and what could be done to remedy the deficit.
No comments:
Post a Comment