MOST RED INK EVER: $9 TRILLION Over Next Decade

[007]

MOST RED INK EVER: $9 TRILLION Over Next Decade​

By JIM KUHNHENN, Associated Press Writer – 20 mins ago

WASHINGTON – In a chilling forecast, the White House is predicting a 10-year federal deficit of $9 trillion — more than the sum of all previous deficits since America's founding. And it says by the next decade's end the national debt will equal three-quarters of the entire U.S. economy.

But before President Barack Obama can do much about it, he'll have to weather recession aftershocks including unemployment that his advisers said Tuesday is still heading for 10 percent.

Overall, White House and congressional budget analysts said in a brace of new estimates that the economy will shrink by 2.5 to 2.8 percent this year even as it begins to climb out of the recession. Those estimates reflect this year's deeper-than-expected economic plunge.

The grim deficit news presents Obama with both immediate and longer-term challenges. The still fragile economy cannot afford deficit-fighting cures such as spending cuts or tax increases. But nervous holders of U.S. debt, particularly foreign bondholders, could demand interest rate increases that would quickly be felt in the pocketbooks of American consumers.

Story continues here...

 

[007]

Yup... there's our little COMMUNITY ORGANIZER at work aye... he REALLY KNOWS HIS SHIT when it comes to MONEY don't he?

I'd laugh but it's not funny. We're fucked, and this little buffoon and his liberal spending machine want to spend MORE! My GOD people.... the guy has to be STOPPED! Our economy is on the fast track to certain RUIN AS IT IS!

 

[Polk]

In addition, the failure of past administrations to follow PAYGO rules has had a direct effect on our fiscal situation. If we had abided by this approach during the previous Administration, the projected 10-year deficit would be $5 trillion smaller. In other words, more than half of the projected deficits over the next 10 years are directly attributable to the previous Administration’s failure to follow the pay-as-you-go principle.

Read more: Deficit projection grows by $2 trillion - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

But I guessing Bush's failure to pay for his projects is somehow Obama's fault.

 

[elvis]

In addition, the failure of past administrations to follow PAYGO rules has had a direct effect on our fiscal situation. If we had abided by this approach during the previous Administration, the projected 10-year deficit would be $5 trillion smaller. In other words, more than half of the projected deficits over the next 10 years are directly attributable to the previous Administration’s failure to follow the pay-as-you-go principle.

Read more: Deficit projection grows by $2 trillion - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

But I guessing Bush's failure to pay for his projects is somehow Obama's fault.

Yeah, that's it shitstain. Don't let anyone criticize your Ossiah.

 

[007]

In addition, the failure of past administrations to follow PAYGO rules has had a direct effect on our fiscal situation. If we had abided by this approach during the previous Administration, the projected 10-year deficit would be $5 trillion smaller. In other words, more than half of the projected deficits over the next 10 years are directly attributable to the previous Administration’s failure to follow the pay-as-you-go principle.

Read more: Deficit projection grows by $2 trillion - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

But I guessing Bush's failure to pay for his projects is somehow Obama's fault.

What Bush did or didn't do has ZERO bearing on what obama is doing NOW. obama inherited a bad situation and is making it worse, much, MUCH worse.

Do you have anything to say now that won't include Bush?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

In addition, the failure of past administrations to follow PAYGO rules has had a direct effect on our fiscal situation. If we had abided by this approach during the previous Administration, the projected 10-year deficit would be $5 trillion smaller. In other words, more than half of the projected deficits over the next 10 years are directly attributable to the previous Administration’s failure to follow the pay-as-you-go principle.

Read more: Deficit projection grows by $2 trillion - Mike Allen - POLITICO.com

But I guessing Bush's failure to pay for his projects is somehow Obama's fault.

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

By the way? Bush is no longer President. What Bush did or not is irrelevant. Love how your sole defense is well Bush spent some money too.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

 

[Polk]

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.

By the way? Bush is no longer President. What Bush did or not is irrelevant. Love how your sole defense is well Bush spent some money too.

It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits. Also, the Democrats only had control of Congress for two years of the Bush presidency.

 

[elvis]

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.

By the way? Bush is no longer President. What Bush did or not is irrelevant. Love how your sole defense is well Bush spent some money too.

It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits.

Aren't you sore from having Obama's dick up your ass?

 

[007]

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits. Also, the Democrats only had control of Congress for two years of the Bush presidency.

Nothing "funny" about it at all, and "increasing in spending" was exactly what SHOULDN'T have been done. Too much spending is what got us where we're at in the first place. We need to wake Washington up and tell them to STOP SPENDING, PERIOD.... STOP SPENDING.... THERE IS NO MORE MONEY.... THE GOVERNMENT IS BROKE.... STOP SPENDING!!!

And I don't give a flying FUCK who the President is.

 

[007]

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.




It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits.

Aren't you sore from having Obama's dick up your ass?

It ain't obama's dick up his ass elvis... here's his picture...

 

[Care4all]

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.




It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits.

Aren't you sore from having Obama's dick up your ass?

Clarifying falsities or (lies) that were said, does not necessarily equate to having obama's dick up your ass, ya know....?

-This recession did begin in late 2006 and early in to 2007.
-The Democrats did take the majority and began January of 2007, they were not in control of the budget for 3 years or in power for 3 years of the Bush presidency.
-Less tax revenues are being collected in a recession which automatically translates to higher deficits.
-President Bush signed all spending bills under his rule and did not veto one.
-Although I was against the stimulus, we can not call it a failure, not yet.

If $5 trillion of the projected $9 trillion deficit comes from the bush era actions then that ain't something to so easily thrown out or be ignored, why ignore it...does this mean you have your head up Bush's ass still?

care

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obama is doubling what Bush spent and you find that ok? He has not turned off the war that he claimed he would, he has not fixed the economy like he promised if we just rushed through a hog of a money wasteful bill, he has not brought us a more open and transparent government, in fact, he has not delivered on a single campaign promise.

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.

By the way? Bush is no longer President. What Bush did or not is irrelevant. Love how your sole defense is well Bush spent some money too.

It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.

By the way dumb ass 3 years of Bush's Presidency had democrats in control and the BIGGEST spending occurred last year under the Democrats. And yet we are headed for a new high in deficit spending. This year alone it will be over 1.5 TRILLION dollars. every dollar the Government spends is half borrowed. And it will be worse next year.

Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits. Also, the Democrats only had control of Congress for two years of the Bush presidency.

In Bush's first term the Democrats controlled the Senate for a YEAR. Further if one pays attention the House market that brought everyone down was created by DEMOCRATS. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were claiming just weeks before the bubble burst that all was sound and fine. No need for regulation, no need for worry and in fact barney Frank claimed if the Government did create more regulations it would HURT a booming industry.

 

[elvis]

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.




It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.



Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits.

Aren't you sore from having Obama's dick up your ass?

Clarifying falsities or (lies) that were said, does not necessarily equate to having obama's dick up your ass, ya know....?

-This recession did begin in late 2006 and early in to 2007.
-The Democrats did take the majority and began January of 2007, they were not in control of the budget for 3 years or in power for 3 years of the Bush presidency.
-Less tax revenues are being collected in a recession which automatically translates to higher deficits.
-President Bush signed all spending bills under his rule and did not veto one.
-Although I was against the stimulus, we can not call it a failure, not yet.

If $5 trillion of the projected $9 trillion deficit comes from the bush era actions then that ain't something to so easily thrown out or be ignored, why ignore it...does this mean you have your head up Bush's ass still?

care

Nice try. but I didn't vote for Bush in 2004 and haven't supported him for many years. It isn't just this post but many other of his posts that makes every excuse imaginable for Obama. Everything that goes wrong is still Bush's fault.

 

[elvis]

He was clear during the campaign to state he did not support immediate withdrawal. The war in Iraq is really a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't issue for him, because not withdrawing leaves him for being criticized for not living up to a campaign promise he never made and withdrawal would leave the same people complaining that he's not putting the interest of the nation first.

As for your declaration of the stimulus as a failure, I'd suggest taking a look at the second quarter GDP numbers.




It's pretty shameless to blame one person for the actions of another.



Funny how a large recession (causing a decline in revenue) and efforts to counteract the effects of said recession (increasing in spending) result in deficits.

Aren't you sore from having Obama's dick up your ass?

Clarifying falsities or (lies) that were said, does not necessarily equate to having obama's dick up your ass, ya know....?

-This recession did begin in late 2006 and early in to 2007.
-The Democrats did take the majority and began January of 2007, they were not in control of the budget for 3 years or in power for 3 years of the Bush presidency.
-Less tax revenues are being collected in a recession which automatically translates to higher deficits.
-President Bush signed all spending bills under his rule and did not veto one.
-Although I was against the stimulus, we can not call it a failure, not yet.

If $5 trillion of the projected $9 trillion deficit comes from the bush era actions then that ain't something to so easily thrown out or be ignored, why ignore it...does this mean you have your head up Bush's ass still?

care

you are correct and incorrect at the same time regarding the three years. If you recall, when that senator from Vermont became an independent, the Senate became democratic between 2001 and 2003.

 

[rightwinger]

Lets but that $9 Trillion over 10 years in perspective. In the last year of the Bush administration, Americans lost $10.2 Trillion in personal wealth. Thats the money you had in equity in your home, your 401K and any other investments. We could have wiped out our entire national debt with the money we lost in Bush's last year.
Now the good news.......since President Obamas election in January, personal wealth has rebounded almost $4 Trillion with the increase in the stock market and home prices.


America Lost $10.2 Trillion Of Wealth In 2008

America Lost $10.2 Trillion In 2008
John Carney|Feb. 3, 2009, 2:57 PM|14
PrintYou'll hear lots of talk about how recessions are caused because people feel poorer or irrationally react to a flood of bad economic news. But the truth is that these depressed feelings are rooted in reality. Americans don't just feel poorer, they are poorer:

U.S. homeowners lost a cumulative $3.3 trillion in home equity during 2008, according to a report from Zillow. (MortgageWire.)

One in six homeowners is now underwater on their mortgage.
The stock market erased $6.9 trillion in shareholder wealth in 2008.
Add together the loss of housing equity of $3.3 trillion and the stock market loss of $6.9 trillion, and you've got a historic loss of wealth of $10.2 trillion.

To put that number in perspective, it's almost one fifth of the GDP of the entire world. It's about the size of the US Debt at the end 2008, meaning we could have paid off the entire debt of our government with the money we lost last year.
Thankfully, past performance may not indicate future results. Maybe now that we've finally lost $10 trillion we're coming near the bottom. Fingers crossed, guys!

 

[Polk]

In Bush's first term the Democrats controlled the Senate for a YEAR.

Controlling the Senate is not the same as controlling Congress, even more so since appropriations must originate in the House.

Further if one pays attention the House market that brought everyone down was created by DEMOCRATS. Barney Frank and Chris Dodd were claiming just weeks before the bubble burst that all was sound and fine. No need for regulation, no need for worry and in fact barney Frank claimed if the Government did create more regulations it would HURT a booming industry.

It's not the fault of Democrats that banks chose to give risky loans.

 

[rightwinger]

Under President Bush, the US went into its largest recession in over 70 years. In the last year of the Bush presidency, Americans lost $10.2 Trillion in personal wealth. Thats the money we had in our homes and in the stockmarket and other investments. This is what a recession does
http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/...wealth-in-2008

Faced with a choice of having the recession turn into a depression or borrowing money to reverse the recession, Obama borrowed money. The same tactic used by FDR and Ron Reagan when they faced their economic crisis. Current trends show that the tactic worked. The index of leading economic indicators is up for the fourth straight month. Most economists are predicting an end to the recession.

Come 2012, Obama will remind us of the Bush numbers and how the republicans advocated doing nothing in the face of a depression.

 

[The_Halfmoon]

I hope China increases its number of strip clubs... they'll need somewhere to throw away those useless US dollar bills

 

[007]

Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush... it's like a broken record. obama is President, is spending us into certain financial deficit ruin, and all the liberals can say is Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. How outlandishly pathetic, and such a stark example of just how brain washed they are by their messiah.

 

[rightwinger]

Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush... it's like a broken record. obama is President, is spending us into certain financial deficit ruin, and all the liberals can say is Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. How outlandishly pathetic, and such a stark example of just how brain washed they are by their messiah.

If we can't say Bush, Bush, Bush...

How about Reagan, Reagan, Reagan? Reagan tripled the deficit
How about FDR, FDR, FDR? FDR spent five times the existing deficit

Spending and borrowing when faced with a recession or in FDR case a depression has been a sucessful practice in the past