A graph really says it - 2009 - 2019 deficit projections

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CPA
Are you serious? Do you believe Obama will cut anything? If you do, I have some swampland in Florida I'd like to sell you.
Congress seems pretty keen on cutting. Did you catch my previous post?

Let me know when the drop the butter knive and pick up the meat cleaver. This budget is huge.

Okay, let's review:

House and the Senate budget writers trimmed some of Obama's spending proposals, cut his budget outlook from 10 years to five years, and refused to endorse administration plans for fees on greenhouse gas emissions and limits on tax deductions for wealthier earners. Still, they at least gave a symbolic endorsement of Obama's call to begin an overhaul of health care, reduce dependence on foreign oil and confront global climate change, leaving the politically crunching details for later.

The Democrats' budget plans also jettisoned $250 billion in spending that Obama had included in his budget as a placeholder for future bank rescues.

http://www.google.com/hostedne...3GE0cyKmUwTJAD97744K00

Right there, we've more than closed the $100 B gap as reported by the CBO for this year and have reduced spending by another $150 B. Let's not stop there, shall we?

The draft unveiled Tuesday by Senate Democrats reflected significant changes to Mr. Obama?s proposal. It drops his appeal to set aside money for future bank bailouts, provides only a temporary fix for a mandatory income tax increasingly hitting the middle class and leaves open-ended the handling of major health care and energy initiatives. Administration officials sought to play down any differences, saying they were satisfied with the emerging plans.

Senator Kent Conrad, Democrat of North Dakota and chairman of the Budget Committee, said the base proposal he would present saved $608 billion over five years compared with the president?s plan.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03...dget.html?ref=politics

Oh? So the budget proposal wending through Congress shaves $608 B off Obama's proposal? Hmmmm, you know, now I'm starting to see the foolishness of making projections from a budget proposal. Huh, how about that? Who would have thought that? Hmmm...
 

Modular

Diamond Member
Jul 1, 2005
5,027
67
91
Just another reason to switch to a worldwide currency. It'll make paying all our debt off that much easier. Then we can move to global socialism.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
I think I need to bump this as a few morans around here are acting like somehow we're in some fiscally conservative period in history...
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
I think those estimates assume we don't raise taxes more.
Raise taxes to 100% and it still won't pay for it.

And I do believe this is based on Obama's budget and therefore includes his tax increases, including cap & tax.
 
Feb 19, 2001
20,155
23
81
Originally posted by: Corn
Love this thread!

Oh yeah.

Originally posted by: senseamp
I think those estimates assume we don't raise taxes more.

Ok what is this, a desperate attempt to show the estimates are dishonest? And how much can you get by raising taxes. Oh, don't forget, we gotta hold Obama to his word about the $250,000 mark :D
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: Corn
Love this thread!

Oh yeah.

Originally posted by: senseamp
I think those estimates assume we don't raise taxes more.

Ok what is this, a desperate attempt to show the estimates are dishonest? And how much can you get by raising taxes. Oh, don't forget, we gotta hold Obama to his word about the $250,000 mark :D

It was never $250k. Biden admitted it being around $200k, then $170k, and lastly $110K.
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,899
63
91
Originally posted by: alchemize
I think I need to bump this as a few morans around here are acting like somehow we're in some fiscally conservative period in history...

We havent been for about a decade.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
I wonder where this concern was over the past 8 years?
Cause that's what really matters.

If it didnt matter over the last 8 years why would it matter now?
Obviously to you it doesn't.

And obviously it didnt to you.
I bet I could find at least 20 posts of mine in the last 8 years where I expressed dissatisfaction with Bush's spending. Still looking for one post in this thread from Obama's ilk.

Super-quick search found a few quotes from me:

1/25/2005
My thread: Balanced Budget: Why can't we make this happen?
/edit: and for the record, yes I do blame the repubs and bush admin. They could be pushing this, and I would prefer they push this over SS reform. I also blame the dems. More blame lies with the repubs since they are "in power".

Tax cuts shouldn't have been put in place without resulting spending cuts.

That's why we need consitutional limits to how our government manages it's debt.



12/30/2005
Clearly the republicans are primarily to blame for the current deficit spending. They hold the power.


1/7/2004
I'd only support a permanent tax cut if we also pass a balanced budget amendment...something nobody mentions anymore.

Obligatory footnote: I don't support deficit spending. Problem is, neither party will touch the true deficit explosion of SS & medicare. Defense is mere pennies on the dollar.


12/16/2003
You aren't going to tell me that a Democratic Congress and a Democratic Pres is going to spend less, are you?

:shocked: Holy shit, did I not even begin to fathom...


1/26/2004
Oh here's a GREAT thread by DealMonkey!!!
Budget office projects U.S. deficit to hit $477 billion
DealMonkey: "Are we going for the all-time record here, or what?"

/here's a nice cup of STFU
//crickets

Morning bump for Cliftonite, he seems to have vanished after that last post.
Hi cliftonite, welcome back to the thread! Awaiting your response...

 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Oh yeah, still waiting for one single post by any leftie poster with any concerns about this level of spending/deficits. Come on, get all Colin Powelly on us...
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,631
9,911
136
Originally posted by: Mursilis
I can't remember the last time any program got cut to the tune of $100B. Space station? Supercollider? Anyone? Yes, theoretically, Obama could go at the budget with an axe, and <poof>, deficits gone, but we both know that won't happen.

I hear the military still has a budget over $100B. Say goodbye.
 

Wreckem

Diamond Member
Sep 23, 2006
9,545
1,122
126
Obama's deficits are also projected on 4% growth. So actual numbers could be higher. They could be lower if taxes are raised, but I dont see taxes being raised other than to pay for certain pet projects not to help the deficit.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Originally posted by: Wreckem
Obama's deficits are also projected on 4% growth. So actual numbers could be higher. They could be lower if taxes are raised, but I dont see taxes being raised other than to pay for certain pet projects not to help the deficit.

Will. Will be higher.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I guess this is going to blow the whole "D's are more fiscally responsible than R's Graph" all to shit...
I touted that a lot last year because it was true, but hot hell damn look at what the D are doing in 2009, blowing that sh*t right out of the water. And most democrats around P&N pretend it doesn't even matter.
Will. Will be higher.
Most frigging definitely.
 

alphatarget1

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2001
5,710
0
76
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: alchemize
Originally posted by: cliftonite
I wonder where this concern was over the past 8 years?
Cause that's what really matters.

If it didnt matter over the last 8 years why would it matter now?
Obviously to you it doesn't.

And obviously it didnt to you.
I bet I could find at least 20 posts of mine in the last 8 years where I expressed dissatisfaction with Bush's spending. Still looking for one post in this thread from Obama's ilk.

Super-quick search found a few quotes from me:

1/25/2005
My thread: Balanced Budget: Why can't we make this happen?
/edit: and for the record, yes I do blame the repubs and bush admin. They could be pushing this, and I would prefer they push this over SS reform. I also blame the dems. More blame lies with the repubs since they are "in power".

Tax cuts shouldn't have been put in place without resulting spending cuts.

That's why we need consitutional limits to how our government manages it's debt.



12/30/2005
Clearly the republicans are primarily to blame for the current deficit spending. They hold the power.


1/7/2004
I'd only support a permanent tax cut if we also pass a balanced budget amendment...something nobody mentions anymore.

Obligatory footnote: I don't support deficit spending. Problem is, neither party will touch the true deficit explosion of SS & medicare. Defense is mere pennies on the dollar.


12/16/2003
You aren't going to tell me that a Democratic Congress and a Democratic Pres is going to spend less, are you?

:shocked: Holy shit, did I not even begin to fathom...


1/26/2004
Oh here's a GREAT thread by DealMonkey!!!
Budget office projects U.S. deficit to hit $477 billion
DealMonkey: "Are we going for the all-time record here, or what?"

/here's a nice cup of STFU
//crickets

Morning bump for Cliftonite, he seems to have vanished after that last post.
Hi cliftonite, welcome back to the thread! Awaiting your response...

This is pwnage at its best...
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
I think all you've proved with the bump is that you are a perennial complainer. ;)

This is the sorts of times we need to have deficit spending. The economy is contracting due to lowering consumer and business spending. Gov't can counteract that by injecting its own spending into the economy and prop it up/mitigate a worsening recession (least so the theory goes.)

The deficits are terrible, but they were terrible before Obama got in, and much of it was a result of actions/consequences prior to Jan 20. At least this spending is useful to stave off a deeper recession/depression (maybe, hopefully) and hopefully fix some things long neglected. Pres Dummy used deficit spending egregiously and excessively during economic growth and relative peacetime (other than the war he started.) Not too mention to boost popularity not making any tough decisions on things.

The reality: We should expect bad deficits this year, next year, and likely a 3rd at this pace of recovery. The largest parts of the budget are military and SS and medicare. Cutting military now will have a neg impact on the economy just as the same way a GM/Chry liquidation would have had on the auto parts manufacturers. It needs a pass for a few years. SS/Medicare? The boomers are retiring age and broke, now many loosing jobs and the little savings they had in the market. If we pull pack spending there now, there will be severe consequences to the econ and society in general on people who have already got into a bad bind.

Let not forget there are declining revenues due to bad econ. Its quite possible to cut spending to find same deficits if the econ is shit for it. We have to get growth going as job #1.


Future: There will be tax increases. They were too low to begin with, and we got to pay down debt in case of another emergency. We've lived beyond our means for too long. We have to cut SS benefits as well. Raise ages, etc. This will be a race to get econ going before the full brunt of the boomers go on the dole. Rock meet hardplace. (Thank god we didn't throw the SS trust fund into wall st like Bush wanted to do...) Defense also has to come down as well. Other cuts. Just not now or 2010.

All this is political poison. Nobody wants to raise taxes or throw grandma out into the street. Has to be done tho. This is what Obama should be judged by. He's in an impossible situation. Do what's right and be savaged (GOP 2012: Obama loves taxes, hates Granny and the Military.) or take the cowards way out and do nothing (Bush) and be beat up for the debt. He's going to be lucky to get a 2nd term no matter what, save miracle recovery.

I won't flame him now for doing what he thinks is right (tho its so easy to do.) I'm waiting to see how it plays out, and really no one knows how to fix this fucking thing anyway. I'll judge him on being faithful to what he thinks is right, making the hard choices, and hope like hell it works.

There is a legitimate debate to whether stimulus infrastructure spending is more effective vs tax cuts (GOP way.) That won't be the debate. Either side would have ended up w/ record deficits, but the hacks and dopes will argue how its all Obama's fault and take cheap shots and distortions and do their unwitting best to see the right things are not done as they are so controversial, crash the country, and hope to inherit the wreckage.
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,899
63
91
Originally posted by: alchemize
Oh yeah, still waiting for one single post by any leftie poster with any concerns about this level of spending/deficits. Come on, get all Colin Powelly on us...

Who isn't concerned? Obviously this level of spending is neither healthy nor sustainable.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Originally posted by: Bitek
I think all you've proved with the bump is that you are a perennial complainer. ;)

This is the sorts of times we need to have deficit spending. The economy is contracting due to lowering consumer and business spending. Gov't can counteract that by injecting its own spending into the economy and prop it up/mitigate a worsening recession (least so the theory goes.)

The deficits are terrible, but they were terrible before Obama got in, and much of it was a result of actions/consequences prior to Jan 20. At least this spending is useful to stave off a deeper recession/depression (maybe, hopefully) and hopefully fix some things long neglected. Pres Dummy used deficit spending egregiously and excessively during economic growth and relative peacetime (other than the war he started.) Not too mention to boost popularity not making any tough decisions on things.

The reality: We should expect bad deficits this year, next year, and likely a 3rd at this pace of recovery. The largest parts of the budget are military and SS and medicare. Cutting military now will have a neg impact on the economy just as the same way a GM/Chry liquidation would have had on the auto parts manufacturers. It needs a pass for a few years. SS/Medicare? The boomers are retiring age and broke, now many loosing jobs and the little savings they had in the market. If we pull pack spending there now, there will be severe consequences to the econ and society in general on people who have already got into a bad bind.

Let not forget there are declining revenues due to bad econ. Its quite possible to cut spending to find same deficits if the econ is shit for it. We have to get growth going as job #1.


Future: There will be tax increases. They were too low to begin with, and we got to pay down debt in case of another emergency. We've lived beyond our means for too long. We have to cut SS benefits as well. Raise ages, etc. This will be a race to get econ going before the full brunt of the boomers go on the dole. Rock meet hardplace. (Thank god we didn't throw the SS trust fund into wall st like Bush wanted to do...) Defense also has to come down as well. Other cuts. Just not now or 2010.

All this is political poison. Nobody wants to raise taxes or throw grandma out into the street. Has to be done tho. This is what Obama should be judged by. He's in an impossible situation. Do what's right and be savaged (GOP 2012: Obama loves taxes, hates Granny and the Military.) or take the cowards way out and do nothing (Bush) and be beat up for the debt. He's going to be lucky to get a 2nd term no matter what, save miracle recovery.

I won't flame him now for doing what he thinks is right (tho its so easy to do.) I'm waiting to see how it plays out, and really no one knows how to fix this fucking thing anyway. I'll judge him on being faithful to what he thinks is right, making the hard choices, and hope like hell it works.

There is a legitimate debate to whether stimulus infrastructure spending is more effective vs tax cuts (GOP way.) That won't be the debate. Either side would have ended up w/ record deficits, but the hacks and dopes will argue how its all Obama's fault and take cheap shots and distortions and do their unwitting best to see the right things are not done as they are so controversial, crash the country, and hope to inherit the wreckage.

Quite a long diatribe to say what I've said all along. republicans are Borrow and Spend, democrats are TAX, BORROW, and SPEND. Gridlock is the most effective political party. I appreciate you and others showing your true colors, hopefully we'll return to gridlock at the next election.

If being a perennial complainer means that I want a better life for my children and grandchildren, a life they can AFFORD, then I'll take it. Obviously you and those in power have learned NOTHING from our past mistakes and making them tenfold now.

 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
So there's a $100 B difference for this year? Eh... And as for future years, let me just remind you that economic forecasts are like assholes; everyone's got one.

Eh, just a drop in the bucket right? It's amazing how certain folks were beside themselves when Bush went into deficit and how it would be a burden to their children and their children's children and oh my gawd!!!!!! Now, it's no big deal.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
So there's a $100 B difference for this year? Eh... And as for future years, let me just remind you that economic forecasts are like assholes; everyone's got one.

Eh, just a drop in the bucket right? It's amazing how certain folks were beside themselves when Bush went into deficit and how it would be a burden to their children and their children's children and oh my gawd!!!!!! Now, it's no big deal.

Yeah 100 billion is ~25% of a Bush deficit and demanded a lot of hand wringing and criticism. Now 100 billion is "meh". My how times change.