Numbers regarding the deficit look worse than ever

jeffrockit

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
165
Points
48
The federal government is running massive budget deficits and is expected to continue to do so indefinitely. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects the Obama budget plan would produce $10 trillion in deficits over the period 2011 to 2020. At the end of the decade, the government’s debt would top $20 trillion, or 90 percent of the nation’s GDP. By comparison, from 1789 to 2008, the country accumulated only $5.8 trillion of public debt.

Tax Collecting for Obama’s Welfare State - James C. Capretta - Critical Condition on National Review Online

How much is Obamacare going to "save"?:eusa_liar:
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,912
Points
48
Location
My Shack
This has been inevitable for some time. We are just icing the cake now.

in all fairness the war is now in the official budget.
Which bumps it up substantially.
 
OP
J

jeffrockit

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2008
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
165
Points
48
This has been inevitable for some time. We are just icing the cake now.

in all fairness the war is now in the official budget.
Which bumps it up substantially.

Yes but for 119 years vs 1 1/2 and there were many wars through that time period.
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,912
Points
48
Location
My Shack
Reagan inherited a nation debt of 700 billion if I remember correctly.
We went sharply uphill ever since.
Clowntyoon was getting a handle on a balanced budget, but then Bush added another 5 trillion or so and that combined with the worst recession in recent history pretty much guaranteed screwing the pooch. Then a few trillion on the war and reconstruction money...

Then throw in dismal wage growth and jobs leaving America and us becoming a consumer based economy....
 

007

Charter Member
Joined
May 8, 2004
Messages
46,751
Reaction score
17,076
Points
2,250
Location
Podunk, WI
The federal government is running massive budget deficits and is expected to continue to do so indefinitely. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects the Obama budget plan would produce $10 trillion in deficits over the period 2011 to 2020. At the end of the decade, the government’s debt would top $20 trillion, or 90 percent of the nation’s GDP. By comparison, from 1789 to 2008, the country accumulated only $5.8 trillion of public debt.

Tax Collecting for Obama’s Welfare State - James C. Capretta - Critical Condition on National Review Online

How much is Obamacare going to "save"?:eusa_liar:

And even those predictions are pretty rosy. In all reality, it's probably much worse than that. It always is.

Yes our economy is a train wreck right in the middle of happening. Economist have already warned that we better change course, and RIGHT NOW, or we're going off the cliff. And even if obama hadn't added so much to the deficit, the warnings were that the cuts it *WILL* take to get us back on track, "WILL TEST THE COHESIVE FABRIC OF OUR SOCIETY." Yes, the warnings are dire. There will probably be riots, armed marauding bands of thugs and thieves, or even another all out Civil War. It's coming. I've been saying this for over five years now, right here on this very board, and now the time is near, so very near. If massive cuts in government spending aren't undertaken all but IMMEDIATELY, which you and I both know will NOT happen, I give us five more years at the very most before this country is in full anarchy.
 
Last edited:

Xenophon

Gone and forgotten
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
16,705
Reaction score
3,927
Points
48
Location
In your head
Barry has a solution, its called a VAT tax, which means the government will tax EVERYTHING.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,662
Points
48
Location
Maine
Reagan inherited a nation debt of 700 billion if I remember correctly.
We went sharply uphill ever since.
Clowntyoon was getting a handle on a balanced budget, but then Bush added another 5 trillion or so and that combined with the worst recession in recent history pretty much guaranteed screwing the pooch. Then a few trillion on the war and reconstruction money...

Then throw in dismal wage growth and jobs leaving America and us becoming a consumer based economy....

No...we did not.

You don't remember that the deficit was going DOWN under Clinton?

It didn't start to get UP again, until Bush II took office.
 

Claudette

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
42,211
Reaction score
12,841
Points
2,250
You are right. Clinton, with his Rep congress, balanced the budget.

Bush took office and then 9-11 and war happened. The clowns in Congress were all spending like drunken sailors. Oh yes. Remember it well. The beginning of the deficit woes.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,662
Points
48
Location
Maine
You are right. Clinton, with his Rep congress, balanced the budget.

Bush took office and then 9-11 and war happened. The clowns in Congress were all spending like drunken sailors. Oh yes. Remember it well. The beginning of the deficit woes.


EXACTLY...the deficiet is a Bipartisan disaster.

The masters don't want an END to the deficiet, folks.

That's the base mechansim that keeps them in power.

My god! Surely I cannot be the only person on this board who sees how this ongoing intergenerational system of power and control over our government and our society actually works, can I?
 

blastoff

Undocumented Reg. User
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
21,493
Reaction score
2,859
Points
280
Location
In a galaxy far far away...
The federal government is running massive budget deficits and is expected to continue to do so indefinitely. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects the Obama budget plan would produce $10 trillion in deficits over the period 2011 to 2020. At the end of the decade, the government’s debt would top $20 trillion, or 90 percent of the nation’s GDP. By comparison, from 1789 to 2008, the country accumulated only $5.8 trillion of public debt.

Tax Collecting for Obama’s Welfare State - James C. Capretta - Critical Condition on National Review Online

How much is Obamacare going to "save"?:eusa_liar:

Don't forget about the 'other' debt our esteemed Washington clowns have piled up over several decades of truly bipartisanship slight of hand that they conveniently forget to mention whenever the conversation turns to current and projected deficits. Total unfunded liabilities for SSN, Medicare, etc. are currently in the $100 Trillion neighborhood, and growing every year.
 

DiamondDave

Army Vet
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
18,169
Reaction score
2,824
Points
183
Location
MD, on the Potomac River
Reagan inherited a nation debt of 700 billion if I remember correctly.
We went sharply uphill ever since.
Clowntyoon was getting a handle on a balanced budget, but then Bush added another 5 trillion or so and that combined with the worst recession in recent history pretty much guaranteed screwing the pooch. Then a few trillion on the war and reconstruction money...

Then throw in dismal wage growth and jobs leaving America and us becoming a consumer based economy....

No...we did not.

You don't remember that the deficit was going DOWN under Clinton?

It didn't start to get UP again, until Bush II took office.

Yes... under Clinton and the REP congress, the deficit numbers went down... unfortunately not because of cutting entitlements or reducing the size of government... but a lot came from raping our military
 

uscitizen

Senior Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
45,940
Reaction score
4,912
Points
48
Location
My Shack
Reagan inherited a nation debt of 700 billion if I remember correctly.
We went sharply uphill ever since.
Clowntyoon was getting a handle on a balanced budget, but then Bush added another 5 trillion or so and that combined with the worst recession in recent history pretty much guaranteed screwing the pooch. Then a few trillion on the war and reconstruction money...

Then throw in dismal wage growth and jobs leaving America and us becoming a consumer based economy....

No...we did not.

You don't remember that the deficit was going DOWN under Clinton?

It didn't start to get UP again, until Bush II took office.

Yes... under Clinton and the REP congress, the deficit numbers went down... unfortunately not because of cutting entitlements or reducing the size of government... but a lot came from raping our military

The military reductions started under Reagan and Bush I.
Clinton did some on his own but mostly was just continuiing what had already been set into motion by his predecessors.
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
You are right. Clinton, with his Rep congress, balanced the budget.

Bush took office and then 9-11 and war happened. The clowns in Congress were all spending like drunken sailors. Oh yes. Remember it well. The beginning of the deficit woes.

Wrong

The CBO gave the majority of the credit for our gains in the 1990s to the 1993 budget reduction act which recieved not ONE republican vote and Gore had to come in to the senate to break the tie.

Sorry but the Rs dont get to claim credit for what they voted against.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,428
Reaction score
19,008
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
The CBO gave the majority of the credit for our gains in the 1990s to the 1993 budget reduction act which recieved not ONE republican vote and Gore had to come in to the senate to break the tie.

Sorry but the Rs dont get to claim credit for what they voted against.


The CBO only scores what Congress tells them to score.

The Clinton era surpluses are a myth - most of the 90s resulted in expenditures exceeding tax receipts. The latter did increase faster than expenditures in the latter part of the decade, fueled by bubble revenues from the Y2K, Dotcom, and Telecom bubbles.

Here's some data.

4497212542_7de7fb4eca_o.jpg
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007

DiamondDave

Army Vet
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
18,169
Reaction score
2,824
Points
183
Location
MD, on the Potomac River
No...we did not.

You don't remember that the deficit was going DOWN under Clinton?

It didn't start to get UP again, until Bush II took office.

Yes... under Clinton and the REP congress, the deficit numbers went down... unfortunately not because of cutting entitlements or reducing the size of government... but a lot came from raping our military

The military reductions started under Reagan and Bush I.
Clinton did some on his own but mostly was just continuiing what had already been set into motion by his predecessors.

Clinton cut the military to about 1/2 it's gulf war size... Adjusting for inflation, Clinton's cuts to the military and military budget were astonishing.. and I know, I witnessed it first hand... Reagan increased the military
 

Truthmatters

Diamond Member
Joined
May 10, 2007
Messages
80,182
Reaction score
2,265
Points
1,283
The CBO gave the majority of the credit for our gains in the 1990s to the 1993 budget reduction act which recieved not ONE republican vote and Gore had to come in to the senate to break the tie.

Sorry but the Rs dont get to claim credit for what they voted against.


The CBO only scores what Congress tells them to score.

The Clinton era surpluses are a myth - most of the 90s resulted in expenditures exceeding tax receipts. The latter did increase faster than expenditures in the latter part of the decade, fueled by bubble revenues from the Y2K, Dotcom, and Telecom bubbles.

Here's some data.

4497212542_7de7fb4eca_o.jpg



US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP in United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local

pretend all you want Clinton was a better fiscal president than any of your heros.

The CBO said that the savings we saw in the 1990s were made possible by the 1993 budget reduction act that the republican fought tooth and nail. NOT ONE VOTED FOR IT! They then said it would distroy the country and convinced you idiots and you elected them.

The facts are that Clinton did better than Reagan and about any modern president and you guys CRASHED the world economy.

Why the hell would you vote R if you cared about the economy or deficits?
 

Meister

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2009
Messages
44,517
Reaction score
17,857
Points
2,290
Location
Conservative part of the Northwest
Barry has a solution, its called a VAT tax, which means the government will tax EVERYTHING.

I agree with you, Xenophon. I've been ridiculed for stating it in other posts, but this will help get us in line with the rest of the "civilized European nations". People just can't look at the whole picture of what's coming down the pipe.
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,428
Reaction score
19,008
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
The facts are that Clinton did better than Reagan and about any modern president and you guys CRASHED the world economy.

Why the hell would you vote R if you cared about the economy or deficits?


Clinton benefited from increased revenues during a froth economy - expenditures during his era continued to clip up each year.

What created his surpluses was ECONOMIC GROWTH leading to increased tax receipts. Some of that growth was bubble related, which makes the additional spending fueled by it even more of a long term structural problem.

Economic growth is the only thing that will get us out of the current jobless situation, but the way to encourage it is not something Obama is willing to do.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,428
Reaction score
19,008
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
Barry has a solution, its called a VAT tax, which means the government will tax EVERYTHING.

I agree with you, Xenophon. I've been ridiculed for stating it in other posts, but this will help get us in line with the rest of the "civilized European nations". People just can't look at the whole picture of what's coming down the pipe.


A VAT will turn up the volume of lobbying to extreme levels as companies try to get their products and services declared essential for The Poor, and eliminated from the VAT.

In the UK, one type of cracker can include VAT, while another doesn't. It's insane.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top