"Hiding spending does not reduce spending"
About this Quote
Concealment is not austerity. Moving costs off the balance sheet, burying them in side funds, or relabeling them as something else does not change the underlying economic reality. Money still leaves the public purse; obligations still accrue; interest still compounds. The line is a reminder that budgets are not magic tricks. Whether in a household, a company, or a government, accounting presentation can shift attention, but it cannot alter what is actually being spent.
Paul Ryan made this point amid battles over the federal budget, where both parties have relied on devices that soften the optics of fiscal choices. Congress has long used tools like emergency designations, off-budget trust funds, and CHIMPs (Changes in Mandatory Programs) to claim savings on paper while leaving real outlays untouched. The Overseas Contingency Operations account, carved out for war funding, often served as a pressure valve to bypass spending caps without acknowledging higher defense spending. Tax expenditures operate as hidden spending too: subsidies run through deductions and credits look like tax cuts but function as outlays with weaker oversight. Meanwhile, the largest commitments — Social Security, Medicare, and federal pensions — include long-term promises that do not always appear as liabilities in the annual budget, even though they shape the nation’s fiscal path.
The aphorism also speaks to incentives. Hiding spending reduces political pain in the short run by avoiding explicit trade-offs, but it raises long-run costs by eroding discipline and accountability. When the true price of programs is obscured, policymakers postpone choices, debt grows, and interest claims a larger share of revenues. Ryan argued that confronting reality requires clearer accounting and structural reform — deciding priorities, paying for them honestly, and measuring costs consistently. Even his tenure illustrates how difficult that standard is to meet: popular tax cuts and defense increases strained deficits, and gimmicks persisted. The lesson endures anyway. Transparency is not a cure-all, but without it, fiscal restraint is mostly theater.
Paul Ryan made this point amid battles over the federal budget, where both parties have relied on devices that soften the optics of fiscal choices. Congress has long used tools like emergency designations, off-budget trust funds, and CHIMPs (Changes in Mandatory Programs) to claim savings on paper while leaving real outlays untouched. The Overseas Contingency Operations account, carved out for war funding, often served as a pressure valve to bypass spending caps without acknowledging higher defense spending. Tax expenditures operate as hidden spending too: subsidies run through deductions and credits look like tax cuts but function as outlays with weaker oversight. Meanwhile, the largest commitments — Social Security, Medicare, and federal pensions — include long-term promises that do not always appear as liabilities in the annual budget, even though they shape the nation’s fiscal path.
The aphorism also speaks to incentives. Hiding spending reduces political pain in the short run by avoiding explicit trade-offs, but it raises long-run costs by eroding discipline and accountability. When the true price of programs is obscured, policymakers postpone choices, debt grows, and interest claims a larger share of revenues. Ryan argued that confronting reality requires clearer accounting and structural reform — deciding priorities, paying for them honestly, and measuring costs consistently. Even his tenure illustrates how difficult that standard is to meet: popular tax cuts and defense increases strained deficits, and gimmicks persisted. The lesson endures anyway. Transparency is not a cure-all, but without it, fiscal restraint is mostly theater.
Quote Details
| Topic | Money |
|---|
More Quotes by Paul
Add to List
