CBO Scoring Must Be New New Math

[boedicca]

Must be that same CBO produced favorable numbers for the previous administration? And whispered in the ears of the majority leaders before making an announcement? Or are you just sooooooooooooooo disappointed that the figures aren't devastating, and then you could gloat...

And those CBO scores were just as bogus back then. You won't find me defending them anywhere.

I've posted in other threads regarding the poor accounting standards used in the budgeting process. A better view of the poor financial condition of the country is contained in the annual financial report, which is based on more appropriate accrual accounting.

http://www.fms.treas.gov/fr/index.html

The federal government fell further into the red in 2009, with its financial position hitting a deficit of $11.46 trillion.

That figure is 12.3 percent higher than the previous year, according to a new report issued by the Treasury Department on Friday.

The annual report shows that the government's big entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are facing a deficit over the next 75 years of $45.88 trillion, an increase in that deficit of $2.9 trillion in just one year.[/b[

The $11.46 trillion deficit in the government's net financial position in 2009 represents an increase of $1.25 trillion over 2008. The position reflects the government's assets, such as cash, property and investments, minus liabilities, such as the federal debt held by the public.

The new figures are included in the "2009 Financial Report of the United States Government." For more than a decade, Congress has required the executive branch to produce the report to provide a more accurate picture of the government's liabilities. It uses the accrual method of accounting rather than the cash system used in reporting the federal government's annual budget deficits.

Annual report shows government's financial position hit $11.46 trillion deficit in 2009 | StarTribune.com


Given the horrid financial condition without adding another entitlement, ObamaCare is just pouring gasoline on the fire.

 

[MaggieMae]

Must be that same CBO produced favorable numbers for the previous administration? And whispered in the ears of the majority leaders before making an announcement? Or are you just sooooooooooooooo disappointed that the figures aren't devastating, and then you could gloat...

And those CBO scores were just as bogus back then. You won't find me defending them anywhere.

I've posted in other threads regarding the poor accounting standards used in the budgeting process. A better view of the poor financial condition of the country is contained in the annual financial report, which is based on more appropriate accrual accounting.

Current Report: Financial Report of the United States: Publications & Guidance: Financial Management Service

The federal government fell further into the red in 2009, with its financial position hitting a deficit of $11.46 trillion.

That figure is 12.3 percent higher than the previous year, according to a new report issued by the Treasury Department on Friday.

The annual report shows that the government's big entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are facing a deficit over the next 75 years of $45.88 trillion, an increase in that deficit of $2.9 trillion in just one year.[/b[

The $11.46 trillion deficit in the government's net financial position in 2009 represents an increase of $1.25 trillion over 2008. The position reflects the government's assets, such as cash, property and investments, minus liabilities, such as the federal debt held by the public.

The new figures are included in the "2009 Financial Report of the United States Government." For more than a decade, Congress has required the executive branch to produce the report to provide a more accurate picture of the government's liabilities. It uses the accrual method of accounting rather than the cash system used in reporting the federal government's annual budget deficits.

Annual report shows government's financial position hit $11.46 trillion deficit in 2009 | StarTribune.com


Given the horrid financial condition without adding another entitlement, ObamaCare is just pouring gasoline on the fire.

You're correct, of course, that all of the financing should be done on an accrual basis, but then I look at the caption of your thread and wonder why you seemed surprised that the final numbers are different than the CBO's, and probably will be again. Since you researched the 2009 numbers, how about posting what the real numbers were for 2001, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, and 08? Which would show exactly how much the actual deficit rose during those years? Just wondering...

 

[boedicca]

Already asked and answered in other threads. The deficit and debt have been snowballing over time due to entitlement programs.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...re-about-9-7-trillion-debt-3.html#post2102918

 

[Truthmatters]

No becasue of massive military spending

 

[boedicca]

Wrong again TM.

Defense outlays have decreased as a percent of Federal spending:

A bit blurry, but here is a time series showing the growth in entitlements as well:

http://www.urban.org/publications/1001093.html

 

[Charles Stucker]

so it is bad, the bill saves money?

or it is bad if the dems say they are reducing their projected spending

What if, once the bill is in place
1) It costs money
and
2) The projected spending in no way conforms to reality?

What will be done then?
Except for Blame Bush of course.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Wrong again TM.

Defense outlays have decreased as a percent of Federal spending:

Really? Is that with or without the Iraq war factored in? Remember, Bush Jr. did that.

Or, is it with the voodoo economics of Bush Sr.? Remember when he was president and moved the military and federal payday from 30 September to 1 October so that he could put the majority of the budget off till the next fiscal year and tout the savings to the American people?

Or, how's about that rampant military spending that Reagan tried to do when he was building his 500 ship Navy?


You're kinda stupid ain't ya?

 

[boedicca]

You must be confusing me with yourself.

As you have provided not information to refute what I posted, I'll take your lack of anything but insults as a concession that you are wrong.

 

[ABikerSailor]

What I'm telling you Bowing for Dick, is that all politicians do it.

Quit trying to turn this into an Obama only thing.

 

[boedicca]

You just keep proving my point.

Please find one post where I said that this is a phenom limited to Obama.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

The CBO Scoring must be based on New New Math - and Nancy Pelosi must be a psychic.

Despite the fact that no score has been released,

What?

 

[boedicca]

A time stamp on a post is a wonderful bit of G2.

Just sayin'.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Collecting taxes for 10 years with only 6 years of expenditures is cooking the books.

No, it's gathering the necessary funds for up-front costs.

Kinda like smart people do when they want to buy a new car- they save the upfront costs while making sure they'll have the funds for maintenance, fuel, et al.

 

[boedicca]

They aren't saving they money. They are spending it on other things.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Funny.. they didn't care about HBO ratings when it came to Medicare Part B, which was all deficit spending.

 

[boedicca]

I suggest you look at the time series I included a few posts ago showing the growth in entitlements as a percent of federal outlays since the 1960s.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Wrong again TM.

Defense outlays have decreased as a percent of Federal spending:

A bit blurry, but here is a time series showing the growth in entitlements as well:

How Much Federal Spending Is Uncontrollable?

Shocking, as the baby boomers get older and refuse to die like they were supposed to per the estimates when medicare was instituted, the costs of medicare have gone up!

Amazing, as the population increased, the raw population of working poor increased, as well and even without increasing the percentage of the population qualifying, we'd still see an increase in food stamps and other social safety net spending

This is all inexplicable!

 

[boedicca]

Your lack of financial acumen is pretty sad.

Just sayin'.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Your lack of financial acumen is pretty sad.

He's a communist, so it goes with the territory.

 

[beowolfe]

Wrong again TM.

Defense outlays have decreased as a percent of Federal spending:

Really? Is that with or without the Iraq war factored in? Remember, Bush Jr. did that.

Or, is it with the voodoo economics of Bush Sr.? Remember when he was president and moved the military and federal payday from 30 September to 1 October so that he could put the majority of the budget off till the next fiscal year and tout the savings to the American people?

Or, how's about that rampant military spending that Reagan tried to do when he was building his 500 ship Navy?


You're kinda stupid ain't ya?

The chart represents budget number w/o the Iraq and Afghanistan wars factored in. If looking at the 2009 budget (where the wars were actually placed in the DOD budget), you get an answer of about 30% for DOD. And that's with the Stimulus bill added into total expenditures. Remove the stimulus bill and you get a DOD budget of between 45-50% of total federal expenditures.