U.S. Deficit Shrinking At Fastest Pace Since WWII, Before Fiscal Cliff

[Quantum Windbag]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

Believe it or not, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.
In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

He even has a chart to prove it.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-cap...-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2D0jJnBML

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

 

[jillian]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

Believe it or not, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.
In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

He even has a chart to prove it.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-cap...-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2D0jJnBML

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

 

[bucs90]

I guess the biggest thing "wrong" with it is.......well, it makes Obama look pretty good, and Bush look really bad.

 

[bucs90]

I mean look at that graph. From around 92-2000 things were pretty damn good. Then, 2000-2008, it was mostly really bad. Then, around 2010-2011, it picked back upwards.

Why is that?

 

[auditor0007]

The percentage is based on the decrease from a high point of borrowing. There actually is a valid point to this, but there is also a problem. The valid point is that we are growing the economy at a faster pace than we are borrowing. The reasoning can be seen in the simple fact that federal outlays the past three years have barely increased. In fact, I believe that 2011 may have actually seen a decrease in spending from 2010. This would be wonderful if spending was not estimated to increase substantially in the coming years, because that would mean with spending put in a holding pattern, the economy would continue to grow, and borrowing would become a much smaller percentage of GDP, especially if tax revenues increase once the economy starts growing at an even healthier clip.

What is not taken into account is the fact that SS and Medicare spending is going to escalate substantially in the very near future and that will continue for an extended period of time. While short term borrowing may be reduced, we still have a very big long term problem. The bottom line is that the things that caused the massive borrowing over the past four to twelve years are not that big of an issue. That borrowing we can recover from. All the extra spending on stimulus packages, ever the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all the extra unemployment benefits, extra social spending due to so many being unemployed, all of those we can recover from by getting the economy growing at just a decent pace of 3.5 to 4.0 percent. But our long term problem with Medicare specifically is not going away. If all we did at this point was to reign in future spending on SS and Medicare, everything else would work itself out. The easiest way to do that is to raise the retirement age. The problem is that nobody really wants to address what the real problems are, because it is much more politically advantageous to scare people about too much spending on food stamps.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

Believe it or not, the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.
In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

He even has a chart to prove it.

U.S. Deficit Shrinking At Fastest Pace Since WWII, Before Fiscal Cliff - Investors.com

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years, why did it go up in 2009?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I mean look at that graph. From around 92-2000 things were pretty damn good. Then, 2000-2008, it was mostly really bad. Then, around 2010-2011, it picked back upwards.

Why is that?

Because the Republicans had the most congresscritters in the good years?

 

[LoneLaugher]

The percentage is based on the decrease from a high point of borrowing. There actually is a valid point to this, but there is also a problem. The valid point is that we are growing the economy at a faster pace than we are borrowing. The reasoning can be seen in the simple fact that federal outlays the past three years have barely increased. In fact, I believe that 2011 may have actually seen a decrease in spending from 2010. This would be wonderful if spending was not estimated to increase substantially in the coming years, because that would mean with spending put in a holding pattern, the economy would continue to grow, and borrowing would become a much smaller percentage of GDP, especially if tax revenues increase once the economy starts growing at an even healthier clip.

What is not taken into account is the fact that SS and Medicare spending is going to escalate substantially in the very near future and that will continue for an extended period of time. While short term borrowing may be reduced, we still have a very big long term problem. The bottom line is that the things that caused the massive borrowing over the past four to twelve years are not that big of an issue. That borrowing we can recover from. All the extra spending on stimulus packages, ever the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all the extra unemployment benefits, extra social spending due to so many being unemployed, all of those we can recover from by getting the economy growing at just a decent pace of 3.5 to 4.0 percent. But our long term problem with Medicare specifically is not going away. If all we did at this point was to reign in future spending on SS and Medicare, everything else would work itself out. The easiest way to do that is to raise the retirement age. The problem is that nobody really wants to address what the real problems are, because it is much more politically advantageous to scare people about too much spending on food stamps.

Or....the cap could be raised.

 

[jillian]

I guess the biggest thing "wrong" with it is.......well, it makes Obama look pretty good, and Bush look really bad.

kind of wrecks their meme, doesn't it?

 

[ilia25]

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years

The deficit did go down in the past 3 years. For real.

why did it go up in 2009?

Because the tax revenues fell dramatically in 2009. But they started rising again since then.

 

[bucs90]

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years

The deficit did go down in the past 3 years. For real.

why did it go up in 2009?

Because the tax revenues fell dramatically in 2009. But they started rising again since then.

No dummy, tax revenue CANNOT make the deficit go down. GOP'ers told us so.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

Believe it or not, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/the federal deficit has fallen faster over the past three years than it has in any such stretch since demobilization from World War II.
In fact, outside of that post-WWII era, the only time the deficit has fallen faster was when the economy relapsed in 1937, turning the Great Depression into a decade-long affair.

He even has a chart to prove it.

http://news.investors.com/blogs-cap...-fastest-since-world-war-ii.htm#ixzz2D0jJnBML

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

Whenever you see QW posing as someone with a brain, just remember, he believes that we need no government whatsoever.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I guess the biggest thing "wrong" with it is.......well, it makes Obama look pretty good, and Bush look really bad.

Wow! First guess!!

How did you get so smart?

Since you because an Obama Fluffer your IQ has gone like...WOW!

 

[NYcarbineer]

I mean look at that graph. From around 92-2000 things were pretty damn good. Then, 2000-2008, it was mostly really bad. Then, around 2010-2011, it picked back upwards.

Why is that?

Because the Republicans had the most congresscritters in the good years?

No. Because we had Bill Clinton in the WH standing in the way of the Republicans doing what they really wanted to do...

...which starting in 2001 we got to find out.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

He even has a chart to prove it.

U.S. Deficit Shrinking At Fastest Pace Since WWII, Before Fiscal Cliff - Investors.com

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years, why did it go up in 2009?

Because revenues fell almost half a trillion dollars. The massive unnecessary Bush tax cuts coupled with Bush's profligate spending finally came home to roost with the recession.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years

The deficit did go down in the past 3 years. For real.

why did it go up in 2009?

Because the tax revenues fell dramatically in 2009. But they started rising again since then.

The labels of that chart are not labelled, it is meaningless.

 

[konradv]

I read this and my head almost imploded from the sudden loss of intelligence.

He even has a chart to prove it.

U.S. Deficit Shrinking At Fastest Pace Since WWII, Before Fiscal Cliff - Investors.com

This is so stupid that it almost doesn't merit laughing at, but it turns out that there are actually people that buy into this claptrap. Can anyone look at the chart and tell me what is wrong with it? The first one to get it right wins The Internets.

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years, why did it go up in 2009?

You do realize it's based on % of GDP, right? Well then 2009 was the biggest drop of all. Did you even check the data in the spreadsheets? Unless you have alternate data, by all means share it. We're not mind readers.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

yes, we know how much more you know than investors.com.

but then again, it's not like you ever let reality get in your way.

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years, why did it go up in 2009?

You do realize it's based on % of GDP, right? Well then 2009 was the biggest drop of all. Did you even check the data in the spreadsheets? Unless you have alternate data, by all means share it. We're not mind readers.

Feel free to point out where I said something was wrong with the data the idiot used. My problem is how he is interpreting the data to present a false impression of the situation.

 

[konradv]

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years, why did it go up in 2009?

You do realize it's based on % of GDP, right? Well then 2009 was the biggest drop of all. Did you even check the data in the spreadsheets? Unless you have alternate data, by all means share it. We're not mind readers.

Feel free to point out where I said something was wrong with the data the idiot used. My problem is how he is interpreting the data to present a false impression of the situation.

It's right there in the spreadsheet showing annual deficits as % of GDP. 2009 was the largest negative percentage for any year that there was a deficit since the founding of the country, 10.1%!

 

[ilia25]

Tell me something, if the deficit has gone down the last three years

The deficit did go down in the past 3 years. For real.

why did it go up in 2009?

Because the tax revenues fell dramatically in 2009. But they started rising again since then.

The labels of that chart are not labelled, it is meaningless.

Ever seen an eye doctor? 'Cause you long overdue.