The Myth of the Sustainable Public Budget

Nobel Laureate economist Paul Krugman caused a stir on ABC's This Week, expressing the following view to Christina Amanpour on the recommendations by the leadership of the US Debt Reduction Commission:


He later clarified his statement to be less provocative, noting that health care costs had to be better controlled and that there is a need for "several percent" more revenue, which might "most plausibly" come from a value added tax.

He went on to say that "And if we do those two things, we’re most of the way toward a sustainable budget." That is a very tall order. Any serious examination of government costs makes it clear that there is no such thing as a sustainable budget. The unit costs of government services routinely rise, frankly because in government competitive influences are largely absent. When government encounters financial difficulty, it looks for ways to cut services and raise taxes --- that is, ways to reduce customer service or to charge more for what it does. Regrettably, in government, the answer to every question seems to be "more money."

On the other hand, when companies in competitive markets run into fiscal difficulties, their survival requires that they find ways to attract customers and look for ways to lower their prices without cutting service.

Sustainability and government budgets are more often than not an oxymoron, except perhaps for the special interests who live off them (whether of the Right or the Left).