Obama’s years in office, the deficit is projected to be larger than under Bush

[Fuct Jup]

The Bush-era deficits were bad. I know. I spent eight years complaining about the president’s lack of fiscal responsibly (here and here for instance). I even wrote that Republicans during Bush’s time in office made French socialists look like Reagan. However, President Obama's new projected deficits are truly frightening. And the worse part: we haven’t seen it all yet.

Based on Congressional Budget Office (CBO) data, the following chart shows a projection of deficit numbers for each year until fiscal 2018. Each color represents the difference between the projected deficits at different points in time. The purple bars represent the deficit numbers as they were projected back in September 2008; the black and red bars represent the difference between the projected deficits at other points in time. The black bars represent the growth in the projected deficit numbers between September 2008 and January 2009. The red bars represent the difference between the January 2009 projections and the new deficit numbers as projected in August 2009. Finally, the orange bars represent the actual deficit numbers during President Clinton’s last year in office (fiscal 2001) and President Bush’s two terms.

http://inlinethumb57.webshots.com/45496/2999232290104844794S500x500Q85.jpg

First, while President Obama is fond of promoting what he calls a "new ethic of responsibility"—in fact he named his first budget, for fiscal 2010, "A New Era of Responsibility"—that is a misrepresentation of his actual budget plan. For each of Obama’s years in office, the deficit is projected to be larger than any year during Bush’s terms.

Second, Obama is right to note that he inherited a large deficit in fiscal 2009. But as we can see here, he is responsible for growing the deficit beyond expectations in fiscal 2009 and thereafter. In fact, in its January 2009 projections, the CBO built in most of the Bush-era policy spending, including the TARP bailout (which President Obama voted for as a senator) and the takeovers of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In spite of his rhetoric, President Obama bears most of the responsibility for the red part of the bar in fiscal 2009, which includes, among other things, some auto bailouts and $31 billion of additional funding for the omnibus bill, the share of the stimulus funding spent in that fiscal year.

Third, Obama’s deficits are frightening but they promise to get worse. Each month that goes by the president adds spending to the deficit. The August 2009 projections for instance, do not include any of the president’s healthcare reform spending and they assume that the “temporary” stimulus spending will not be prolonged past fiscal 2011. Finally, they also assume that the economy will recover soon and that it will grow enough to generate increasing tax revenue, in spite of the president’s plan to impose new taxes and regulations on the private sector. In other words, the deficit will likely continue to deteriorate beyond the current projections.

The president is right. A new era has started. It’s an era of even bigger government.


Making Bush Look Like a Piker — The American, A Magazine of Ideas (http://www.american.com/archive/2009/september/making-bush-look-like-a-piker)

[Nickdfresh]

You mean like the GOP controlled "conservative" congress that legitimized and voted for every single Bush policy leading to the debt?

[ELVIS]

Dude, Obahhmah is finished. He's losing support from those who supported and voted him into office...

He's done nothing besides spend money, kill jobs, sell off the auto industry and help come up with a 900 billion health care train-wreck that I pray will never pass...

[Nickdfresh]

Dude, Obahhmah is finished.

He is?


He's losing support from those who supported and voted him into office...

Some. He'll gain a good deal back though as the economy rights itself. Just like Reagan. Just like Clinton did...


He's done nothing besides spend money, kill jobs, sell off the auto industry and help come up with a 900 billion health care train-wreck that I pray will never pass...

When you say "spend money," you mean like all politicians do? Even the mouthbreathers you vote for? He didn't kill jobs, fool. The Recession did. In fact, without the Stimulus, we'd be far worse off.

And I'll take a 900 billion dollar health care plan over the current fucking multi-trillion dollar train wreck that is leaving the middle classes behind...

[Nickdfresh]

And Elvis, this is all your fault really. If you hadn't supported and voted for the Bush Administration, which according to your beliefs, murdered everyone on 9/11 with their diabolical "inside job," we wouldn't be in this...

[Jesus Christ]

Nicodemus, on the Last Day, when all the books are opened and all the secrets are known, ye will be surprised what the House of Bush hath done.

Verily, it is sometimes a real bitch to knoweth everything. :(

[ELVIS]

Well, Clinton tried to kill Bin Laden...

LMAO!

[Jesus Christ]

Indeed he did, Gregory. And he came much closer than the Son of Bush ever did, actually hitting a location where Osama had been just hours before.

[Nickdfresh]

Well, Clinton tried to kill Bin Laden...

LMAO!

You see this is where your true "genius" comes out of the closet. On the one hand, Bill Clinton is an asshole because he failed to kill Bin Laden. But on the other hand, you love Bush and continue to defend him and voted for him twice despite believing that he must have been behind 9/11? So, in your little demented world of fundamentalist Christianity and your second religion of conspiracy on the radio, you seem rather confused...

Which is it Flo?

[ELVIS]

It was a joke, cockforbreath...

[letsrock]

Bush at least gave the money back to the people, little as it was.
Obama is only giving money back as favors to those to helped put him in office.
How many Czars does he have now?

It only will take one to pull the trigger.

[FORD]

Bush "gave the money back" to rich bastards who dodge their taxes. That (and the Iraq fuckup) is WHY this country is in such a fucking financial mess.

The solution: Tax the goddamn rich leeches. Repeal all tax cuts back to the Eisenhower era, and make it retroactive for anyone with more than $10 million.

Also, restore the inheritance tax, and make it 100% on all wealth that is more than a generation old. Anyone who truly creates wealth from their own work should be able to leave it to their children. But their great great great grandchildren should NOT be living off of it while the country suffers.

Class warfare? You bet your ass. And it's about time we started fighting back.

[letsrock]

Just like a National sales tax wont work because the Rothchilds, and others that inherited money from way back, look at it as a tax just on there money, because they have no income. No tax.

[letsrock]

Bush "gave the money back" to rich bastards who dodge their taxes. That (and the Iraq fuckup) is WHY this country is in such a fucking financial mess.

The solution: Tax the goddamn rich leeches. Repeal all tax cuts back to the Eisenhower era, and make it retroactive for anyone with more than $10 million.

Also, restore the inheritance tax, and make it 100% on all wealth that is more than a generation old. Anyone who truly creates wealth from their own work should be able to leave it to their children. But their great great great grandchildren should NOT be living off of it while the country suffers.

Class warfare? You bet your ass. And it's about time we started fighting back.

I totally agree. Problem is everyone will still vote all the incumbents right back in. No term limits or anything. And so it goes.

[Nitro Express]

Obama really hasn't been able to get his shit accomplished. The bankers bailout started under Bush and McCain would have done the same as Obama. So we were getting that devistating shit no matter what. Obama is out to break the independant business people with cap and trade and health care. He wants to make everyone dependant on the government. He's going to make your taxes and overhead enormous and then force you to provide expensive healthcare for your employees. This will just run the small businesses out of business. He's just the next chapter in the corporate bought executive branch.

[Nitro Express]

The megga rich and their friends like Timothy Gietner don't pay any income taxes and this guy is head of the US Treasury that runs the IRS. Goldman Sachs who has a revolving door between Washington DC and Wall Street pays a corporate tax of 1%. Obama is their flavor of the week. The rich aren't paying taxes. They are stealing the taxes through the Federal Reserve Bank. Americans should be dipping these guys into hot vats of tar but the average American only cares that they have ten kinds of doughnuts to choose from or who won the football game.

[Nitro Express]

Just like a National sales tax wont work because the Rothchilds, and others that inherited money from way back, look at it as a tax just on there money, because they have no income. No tax.

Evelyn Rothchild bought up Leman Brothers for $2 million after it the sub prime bomb exploded. If you control the central banks you can create bubbles by dropping the prime rate and then when the bubble explodes you buy the assets up cheap. It's corporate raiding on a mass scale. This family has caused multiple wars and depressions over the last 200 years. They are good at what they do and make a ton of money off other people's misery.

[Nickdfresh]

It was a joke, cockforbreath...

It's always a "joke," coma-victim raper...

[Fuct Jup]

WASHINGTON – The federal budget deficit tripled to a record $1.4 trillion for the 2009 fiscal year that ended last week, congressional analysts said Wednesday.

The Congressional Budget Office estimate, while expected, is bad news for the White House and its allies in Congress as they press ahead with health care overhaul legislation that could cost $900 billion over the next decade.

The unprecedented flood of red ink flows from several factors, including a big drop in tax revenues due to the recession, $245 billion in emergency spending on the Wall Street bailout and the takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Then there is almost $200 billion in costs from President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill, as well as increases in programs such as unemployment benefits and food stamps.

The previous record deficit was $459 billion and was set just last year.

The Obama health plan would be "paid for" with new revenues and curbs in spending. But the overhaul effort would eat up tax increases and spending cuts that could be used to bring the deficit down.

Obama has attributed the nation's dismal fiscal situation to the financial and economic crises he inherited. White House Budget Director Peter Orzsag is overseeing the administration's efforts to tackle the soaring deficit next year.

"As part of the fiscal 2011 budget, we will be putting forward proposals that return us to a fiscally sustainable path and that have lower deficits in the out-years," Orszag said in a recent Associated Press interview.

The huge deficits have raised worries about the willingness of foreigners to keep purchasing Treasury debt. The administration promises that once the recession is over and the financial system is stabilized, it will move forcefully to get the deficits under control.

Economists worry that the deficits could place upward pressure on interest rates in future years as the government has to offer higher rates to attract investors

Republicans pounced on the bad news.

"This new CBO data makes it clear that our children and grandchildren will end up buried under a mountain of debt if we continue taxing, spending and borrowing at these dangerous levels," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said. "How many alarm bells have to be set off before Washington Democrats get serious about tackling dangerous budget deficits?"

Economists say the best measure of the deficit is to compare it with the size of the economy. On those terms, the 2009 deficit reached almost 10 percent of gross domestic product, a level not witnessed since World War II.

The White House says it wants deficits in the next few years to stabilize at or below 3 percent of GDP. But by the White House's own estimates released in August — which predicted deficits averaging about 4 percent through the rest of the decade — it would take several hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes or spending curbs to just get the deficit down to 3 percent of GDP.

Those steps would easily exceed the efforts under way now to pay for Obama's health care plan. For example, bringing the 2014 deficit back in line with Obama's goals would require about $240 billion in deficit-closing steps in that year alone — near the amount of revenue that would flow from the expiration of former President George W. Bush's tax cuts.

Such steps would almost certainly force Obama to break his promise to limit tax increases to the wealthy.

Other budget experts predict higher deficits that would require even more painful steps.

History has not been kind recently to presidents who tackle the deficit. President George H.W. Bush lost re-election in 1992 after violating his "no new taxes" promise. His successor, Bill Clinton, lost control of Congress in 1994 after pushing through a deficit-reduction plan laden with tax hikes.

Still, Democrats controlling Congress acknowledge they have no choice but to tackle the problem — even if they inherited it from George W. Bush.

"It should be remembered that fiscal year 2009 began during the Bush administration, which left in its wake the worst recession since the 1930s, including a sharp plunge in revenues," said Rep. John Spratt Jr., D-S.C., chairman of the House Budget Committee. "But today's figures send us the latest alarm. As the economy stabilizes and starts to recover, we will have to turn our focus back to deficit reduction."

CBO: Budget deficit hit record $1.4T in 2009 - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091007/ap_on_go_co/us_budget_deficit)

[Nickdfresh]

Right. That's what happens when you have falling revenues due to a sputtering economy. And when was the downturn again? And who cut taxes mostly on the affluent during a time when he started a three trillion dollar mess in Iraq?

BTW, $459 billion is roughly what we spend on defense in one single year; and that's if you take away the War funding the congress and the Pentagon switch around to hide the true number$...

[Fuct Jup]

Right. That's what happens when you have falling revenues due to a sputtering economy. And when was the downturn again? And who cut taxes mostly on the affluent during a time when he started a three trillion dollar mess in Iraq?


Everybody got a tax cut (including you if you had a job).

[Nickdfresh]

Everybody got a tax cut (including you if you had a job).


Lordy lordy! Biscuits and gravy!! A few hundred buck$ while banks effectively decided their own regulation, wages have remained stagnant for over 30 years now, less Americans have health coverage, pensions are a thing of the past, and corporations effectively got a complete break to insure their record profitability with virtually no sense of civic or common good. Praise Jeebus!!.

Nothing like sending checks back to keep the plebeians happy while the empire declines as they vote for people who do not bother to represent their interests because they're too busy being on the take of special interest lobbyists and campaign donors..