Federal Deficit to soar to 407 Billion

#1
W

WA_Vol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2005
Messages
18,663
Likes
12
#1
How much longer can we keep going down this path?

The budget deficit will jump by $246 billion to $407 billion, according to an updated estimate by the Congressional Budget Office released Tuesday.
Last year, the budget deficit was $161 billion. The government's budget year ends Sept. 30.
The agency attributes the jump to "a substantial increase in spending and a halt in the growth of tax revenues."
That drop in revenue is driven largely by the rebates provided to tax filers from the economic stimulus law Congress passed earlier this year. The spending hike is partly due to efforts by the government "to cover the insured deposits of insolvent financial
The CBO said it expected the deficit to exceed $400 billion - or 3% of gross domestic product - for each of the next two years if current policies remain in place. It also forecast several more months of "very slow" economic growth.
"The nation is experiencing a significant period of economic weakness," said Peter Orszag, director of the CBO.
Click to expand...

2008 deficit forecast soars to $407B - Sep. 9, 2008
 
#3
#3
g8terh8ter_eric said:
If Obama gets in you can almost triple the budget deficit number. :good!:
Click to expand...

No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
 
#5
#5
oklavol said:
No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
Click to expand...
So tired of the weak IF OBAMA GETS IN crap
 
#6
#6
oklavol said:
No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
Click to expand...

The whole Republican party platform needs change and honestly so does the Democratic platform. Also though, it takes an estimated 5 billion dollars to fund the legislative branch. Bush should have never allowed the government to grow like it has that's a fact, but government healthcare, welfare, and unemployment will certainly boom under Obama. Sorry but taxing the rich to give to the poor is not a good thought process when trying to grow the economy.
 
#8
#8
oklavol said:
No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
Click to expand...

I agree that no one has ever spent more. On the other hand, no administration has generated more revenue than this one.

I'd like to see both of these go down.
 
#9
#9
oklavol said:
No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
Click to expand...

And democrats have a great track record there? Pointing to one president (Clinton) and claiming a great track record on budgets is kind of like looking at one of UT's scoring drives against UCLA and claiming victory.
 
#11
#11
KB5252 said:
And democrats have a great track record there? Pointing to one president (Clinton) and claiming a great track record on budgets is kind of like looking at one of UT's scoring drives against UCLA and claiming victory.
Click to expand...

I still wonder why Clinton gets high marks for president when he didn't do much?? :dunno:
 
#13
#13
g8terh8ter_eric said:
I still wonder why Clinton gets high marks for president when he didn't do much?? :dunno:
Click to expand...

While I don't agree with a lot of his foreign policy approaches, his military or intelligence policies he was fine on the economy.

With the pressure of a Rep Congress he did NAFTA, welfare reform, etc.

We are likely best with a semi-competent Congress and POTUS from opposing parties.
 
#14
#14
BTW, this Democratic controlled congress passed a budget resolution. Here's a look....


  • [*]Assumes tax increases topping $3 trillion over the next decade, or $3,135 per household annually;
    [*]Includes 64 reserve funds that could be used to raise taxes by hundreds of billions more;
    [*]Increases discretionary spending by 8 percent for the second consecutive year and does not terminate a single wasteful program;
    [*]Completely ignores the impending explosion of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid costs;
    [*]Creates rules that bias the budget toward tax increases; and
    [*]Assumes that Congress will violate its own PAYGO rules.
Click to expand...

Also....


  • [*]Pass SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance) legislation adding $55 billion to the budget deficit;
    [*]Enact a student loan bill with $15 billion in new deficit spending; and
    [*]Waive their own PAYGO rules and enact a farm bill that adds approximately $20 billion to the budget deficit, despite record-high farm incomes.[2]
Click to expand...

Not to forget....


  • [*]At least $55 billion in annual program overpayments;
    [*]$60 billion for corporate welfare;
    [*]$123 billion for programs for which government auditors can find no evidence of success;
    [*]$140 billion in potential budget savings identified in the CBO's "Budget Options" books; and
    [*]Massive program duplication, such as the 342 economic development programs, the 130 programs serving the disabled, the 130 programs serving at-risk youth, and the 90 early childhood development programs.[7]
Click to expand...

There's a reason that this Congress has a 9% approval rating. They didn't change anything based on what they campaigned for in 06.
 
#16
#16
g8terh8ter_eric said:
I still wonder why Clinton gets high marks for president when he didn't do much?? :dunno:
Click to expand...

I thought I was the only one who felt that way. Clinton basically did nothing while in office except Monica. He simply sat in the drivers seat and set the cruise control on everything Reagan set up. He didn't have to do anything to keep it going except a little maintenance which he did NOT do. W never had a chance because of that. If Bill had just done what was needed to maintain what was started, we would not be in the shape we're in now. Yes the economy was good under Clinton, but he wasn't the reason. He was just the recipient of the keys to the car which had already been built.
 
#18
#18
superdave1984 said:
I thought I was the only one who felt that way. Clinton basically did nothing while in office except Monica. He simply sat in the drivers seat and set the cruise control on everything Reagan set up. He didn't have to do anything to keep it going except a little maintenance which he did NOT do. W never had a chance because of that. If Bill had just done what was needed to maintain what was started, we would not be in the shape we're in now. Yes the economy was good under Clinton, but he wasn't the reason. He was just the recipient of the keys to the car which had already been built.
Click to expand...

You honestly believe that? Reagan was good but he gets a little too much credit at times.
 
#19
#19
volinbham said:
While I don't agree with a lot of his foreign policy approaches, his military or intelligence policies he was fine on the economy.

With the pressure of a Rep Congress he did NAFTA, welfare reform, etc.

We are likely best with a semi-competent Congress and POTUS from opposing parties.
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert in economics, but when Clinton left office didn't the economy start to tank?? I mean the technology boom had leveled off and actually subsided in many areas. Clinton takes credit for a booming economy that was going to boom with whoever was in there.
 
#20
#20
TennNC said:
I see that you made a more accurate post below about neither candidate balancing the budget, but current assessments have us in a deeper hole with McCain in the WH:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/Uploa...es_summary.pdf
Click to expand...

Your link doesn't work. The assessment from TPC I saw shows McCain's plan bringing in less revenue but did not address spending. Clearly, Obama is advocating much more spending than McCain.
 
#21
#21
615 Vol said:
You honestly believe that? Reagan was good but he gets a little too much credit at times.
Click to expand...

Reagan's bread and cutter was helping to end the Cold War. That was his meal ticket and conservative's still love him for that. I honestly thought that during Reagan's admin that our country had pretty bad economic problems that carried over to GHWB. Am I wrong??
 
#22
#22
g8terh8ter_eric said:
I'm not an expert in economics, but when Clinton left office didn't the economy start to tank?? I mean the technology boom had leveled off and actually subsided in many areas. Clinton takes credit for a booming economy that was going to boom with whoever was in there.
Click to expand...

The economy moves in cycles - I don't credit Clinton for the tech upswing or downswing. I do think NAFTA and welfare reform were net positives though so I'm giving him credit for those policy decisions.

The surpluses were a result of the tech swing - revenues rose so fast, Congress couldn't spend the surplus.
 
#23
#23
volinbham said:
The economy moves in cycles - I don't credit Clinton for the tech upswing or downswing. I do think NAFTA and welfare reform were net positives though so I'm giving him credit for those policy decisions.

The surpluses were a result of the tech swing - revenues rose so fast, Congress couldn't spend the surplus.
Click to expand...

I think that NAFTA has proven more of a problem in recent years than a positive.
 
#24
#24
Bush spends money like there's no tomorrow; invades Iraq, prescription drug plan for seniors, money to fight aids in Africa, etc he's worse then any President we've ever had in this respect.

Clinton was never this bad. The size of the govt actually shrunk under Clinton, it's soared under Bush. Bush is the worse President in our lifetime. Everyone else is a distant second. He's left the next president a bigger mess then he inherited and did nothing to address the long term problems the country faces, but instead by his irresponsible spending made them worse.
 
#25
#25
oklavol said:
No one has ever spent more money then the current administration. But keep voting Republican. What's the defintion of insanity, keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result? Unless your a Republican, then its a good idea.
Click to expand...

To what extent do you blame the Democratic controlled House and Senate?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top