Stock Groups

How Biden’s economic plan compares to the Great Society and New Deal


Getty Images News – Getty Images| Getty Images News | Getty Images

President Joe Biden’s $3.5 trillion economic agenda — and the social spending it would usher in — has few parallels in modern U.S. history.

Economists and historians say the New Deal of the 1930s and the Great Society of the Sixties are the closest analogies.

Those periods of vast social expansions — marshalled by Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson, respectively — saw the creation of some of our nation’s most popular programs, such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and unemployment insurance.

Biden Build Back Better reforms — which would expand spending in areas like childcare, health care, paid leave and education — shares traits with these past eras but diverges in significant ways, experts said.

They are all vital Stephen MarglinAn economist from Harvard University spoke out about the agenda’s prongs. They are all part of the 21st century’s need for infrastructure and social infrastructure.It is possible to“The century economy”

The rise of social spending

In 1929’s Great Depression, the national government had a very small size. Most social welfare programs at the time were managed and funded locally. John Joseph WallisProfessor of Economics at the University of Maryland.

FDR’s New Deal series in the 1930s changed public expectations of Washington and government involvement in their daily lives.

Economists believe that the greatest and most lasting reforms were Social Security’s retirement benefits and Unemployment Insurance. Some modern-day programs — like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (food stamps) and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (also known as welfare) — have their roots in New Deal reforms.  

The creation of Medicare, Medicaid and other public health plans for senior citizens and the poor was later facilitated by President Johnson’s War on Poverty in 1965.

In 1965, the Federal Government roughly doubled Social Security benefits’ value and in 1972 began to attach them to rising living costs. Irwin GarfinkelProfessor and co-founding Director of the Center on Poverty and Social Policy, Columbia University. (Some of the reforms took place during President Richard Nixon’s tenure.

Garfinkel stated, “What we did during the 1960s was the most amazing, and that was almost eliminating poverty among the elderly.”

Biden’s suggestions come during similar U.S. socio-economic upheaval.

Pandemic was the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. It pushed millions into unemployment in a matter of hours. Concurrent reckoning with racism following George Floyd’s murder harked back at the 1960s civil rights movement and placed a spotlight upon the current recession. unequal impact on minorities and the poor

Experts believe that the U.S. social program had been largely geared towards seniors. Biden’s agenda will shift that emphasis to include children and their families.

One estimate is that his proposal to expand the child tax credit could reduce child poverty half. (Child poverty can be defined as the proportion of children who live in poverty.

Garfinkel explained, “It’s certainly not the same as what we did for older people but it’s not horrible.”

Biden’s proposal to expand senior programs would also be approved by adding vision, dental and hearing benefitsMedicare is an example.

Program cost

It is difficult to compare the total cost and expenditure of Build Back better versus New Deal and Great Society.

One, budgeting tools that the federal government today uses to measure cost were not available back then. According to economists, however, evaluating cost in relation to the U.S. is one of the most effective ways to evaluate programs’ relative scale.

Biden’s $3.5 trillion proposal would be used over a period of 10 years. It amounts to about $350 million per year or 1.5% of current country revenues. $22.7 trillionGross Domestic Product, an indicator of economic output.

The 1.5 point increase in inflation is quite significant compared to the previous several decades, but it is still less than the increases during Roosevelt or Johnson.

Learn more about Personal Finance
Here are the changes that could be coming to your Social Security benefits
Climate change can impact your finances
House Democrats’ tax proposal may affect life insurance for the rich

According to Price Fishback (a University of Arizona professor who studies New Deal politics economy), federal spending on social welfare reached a New Deal peak of 3.6% in 1939. This is a 2.7 percentage-point rise relative to 1983.

Fishback reported that social spending had grown to 7.4% in 1973 from 4.1% in 1963.

Fishback stated that Build Back Better is quite a large sum.[But]He said that it didn’t seem like a major budget-buster.”

It is quite different when we consider the cost of living per person, which accounts for U.S. growth in population over the past century.

Fishback claimed that Biden’s plan will increase social spending by $1,060 annually per person. In comparison, New Deal policies increased spending approximately $400 per person in the 1930s. Over 1963-1973, spending rose $2,571 each person.

We’re changing the definition of safety net to make it more accessible. This will allow more people to access the public resources.

William Hoagland

Bipartisan policy center senior vice-president

Fishback noted that Biden’s proposal to spend money on the Social Welfare System would go beyond existing benefits. The future of the programs is not known.

In its early years, Social Security paid very few benefits, but accountedAbout $1 trillion or 23% of the federal budget for 2019 is available.

The overall price tag might change in congressional negotiations. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), is a key Senate Democrat. said Thursday that he wouldn’t support legislation exceeding $1.5 trillion — less than half the amount of Biden’s proposal.

The difference between spending and investing

Some economists consider federal spending to be investments in the nation’s future, rather than expenditures.

“I nearly think that the [$3.5 trillion]Plan is a little more similar to LBJ’s War On Poverty [than to the New Deal]”Because it is trying to solve long-term strategic questions,” said Krishna KumarDirector of International Research and Senior Economist at RAND Corporation.

Biden explained that his plan focuses on investing in the beginning stages of life, rather than the later years.

Plan includes an expansion of the child tax credit. The plan also calls for lower childcare cost, two-years of universal preschool, twelve weeks of paid family leave and medical leave and two years at no charge community college.

Kumar claimed that in many categories the U.S. trails other rich developed nations in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

This “investment” could yield future economic returns. Garfinkel explained that children who are healthier, better educated, and have higher incomes tend to live for longer periods of time, work harder, pay less taxes, and use the safety net less.

RAND estimates that investing in early childhood programs will return $2-$4 for each dollar spent.

Beyond the New Deal & Great Society

According to economists, Biden’s plan is different from those of its predecessors in certain ways.

Perhaps most importantly, its benefits are spread across a broad swath of the American population — not just the neediest.

The U.S. is now closer to the Scandinavian social model of Norway and Sweden. This may reflect that childcare issues affect middle-class families as well, said economists.

Poor families are the most impacted by the increased child tax credit. However, the extra funds reach households with higher income (individuals earning $200,000 and married couples making up to $400,000.

The average family benefits from the expansion are nearly $5,100. accordingTo the Congressional Research Service.

We are changing the definition of safety nets to be more effective,” he said. William HoaglandA senior vice president of the Bipartisan Political Center, “It will make it easier for more people to have access to public resources.”

This strategy could help Biden win political support. A narrower focus — just on the poorest individuals, for example — is a “recipe for political disaster” because it erodes the base of supporters, according to Marglin, the economist at Harvard.

He stated, “This just how our political system functions.” That was what the great innovators knew.”

He said, “It was something Franklin Roosevelt had known in 1935. I’m certain Lyndon Johnson also knew it in 1965. I’m pretty sure Joe Biden does, too.”