2011 Federal Budget

Here is what, in 2009, the WH projected the 2011 defcit to be... now it's going to be 1.267 Trillion fucking dollars. I love how one year later in projections it has increased over 500 billion dollars. This is also after increasing a mirad of taxes. Also, the deficit this year is going to be higher then the deficit last year, you know the year that he liked to claim was all Bush's fault and that's why it was a record breaking deficit... oh, until his budget kicked in, now this year is the record breaker.

So, to recap.

2010 deficit: = 1.565 Trillion
2011 deficit: = 1.267 Trillion

increase over $800 billion dollars.

Year by year breakdown of interest owed on debt, this takes into account increase in interest rates over that time period but who is to say that is accurate..

ETA:

Here is a site that shows interest by month.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/r...ir_expense.htm

Also worth noting that the Obama administrations record breaking deficits require a huge amount of auctioning of debt, these debt auctions are mostly short term (they'd love to turn it into long term) so the money they're borrowing now will have to be paid earlier thus incresing that graph exponentially beyond anyones wild expectations.. just wait!! This shit's about to go into overdrive!

Here's a search engine for you to figure out what type of debt the government has been selling, if you haven't been paying attention.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/RI/OFA...ction&x=21&y=8

Math ain't your strong point, is it?

Oh my God. Really?

For those of you that didn't get a degree at a higher learning center, or you know... high school.

WH 09 predictions
2010 deficit: 1.2 trillion
WH 10 predictions
2010 deficit: 1.567 trillion
difference + $300 bn (note the 67)

wh 09 predictions
2011 deficit: $830 bn
WH 10 predictions
2011 deficit: 1.267 trillion
difference + $400 billion '(note the 37 difference)

total difference 800+ billion dollars. (note the 67 + 37 = 104 + 700 = 800+)

Hey smartass, next time have your "recap" actually recap your information correctly.

Oh, and looking at your chart, it looks like the White House projected around a $900 trillion deficit for 2011 in '09. If it's now $1.2 trillion, that ain't a $500 billion increase.

off by 2 billion, my bad.. still over 800 billion however, thus you're still dumb.

Quick Dick, which weighs more... 2000 lbs of feathers or 2000 lbs of lead?

2000 lbs of me not giving a shit.

yet you came in here to troll! amazing...

That's the pot calling the kettle ugly and living under a bridge.

Let's look at how your chart scales:


In 2009, the 2011 White House projection was just a shade over $900 billion. Let's call it $925 billion. Not $830 billion like you say.

In 2009, 2010 White House projection was just under $1.2 trillion. Let's call it $1.175 billion. You actually got in the ballpark that time.

So, in 2009, the total two year deficit was $2.1 trillion. It's now projected at $2.834 trillion. Which is an increase of $734 billion. Now that's nothing to sneeze at, but, last I checked, $734 billion was not over $800 billion.

Or did your learning center teach math differently than mine?

More crayons and building blocks.

And yes I'm trolling but I really don't give a shit about engaging this guy on any kind of level. So I guess I'm done.

Troll.

Well I admit fault on my part Dick, I didn't go down and draw lines on a chart and measure to figure out exact numbers instead of simply going with an eye ball estimate. So there you go, I was wrong it wasn't over 800 billion it was over 700 billion and you're right it is nothing to sneeze at since this President is destroying our countries economic future at such record pacing it simply astounds.

Read the chart I linked and ask Dick to draw lines on it to figure out the exact number. It's less then his record breaking deficits by a long shot however and he's going to increase the interest on debt by the end of his Presidency by well over a trillion dollars a year.

Heh, Dick, nice, haven't heard that one before.

I'm sure if you looked up replies in the past, I've always said "Dick" since it's short for Dickson or Richard abbreviated. Much like I say El Cap or.. JVC (before he changed it from Jon Voigts Car).

it isn't a totally different question, that is a chart of interest payments for the next 10 years... eye balling it, it looks like $300 billion dollars in interest.

This is pretty interesting: Obama’s 2011 Budget Proposal, Department by Department
Rectangles in the chart are sized according to the amount of spending for that category. Color shows the change in spending from 2010.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...budget.html?hp

It came off of the Washington Post.

Also, stop for 10 seconds, read the chart I post.. word for word. This isn't for the projected budget over the next 10 years, it's for the interest of debt over the next 10 years.

Presidental debt by President.

Reagan: 1.69 Trillion over 8 years

Bush Sr: 1.4 Trillion over 4 years

Clinton: 1.54 Trillion over 8 years

Bush Jr: 4.9 Trillion over 8 years

Obama: 5-6 Trillion (est) 4 years

Interest for fiscal year 2011 = 350 billion dollars (est)

Deficit for fiscal year 2011 = 1.265 trillion dollars (est)

new debt for fiscal year 2011 NOT interest = 900 billion dollars (est)
new debt for fiscal year 2010 NOT interest = 1.2 Trillion dollars (est)
new debt for riscal year 2009 NOT interst = 1 trillion dollars (est)

no matter how you slice it, Obama is the most reckless fiscal President ever. So, let's remember that a trillion dollars is a trillion dollars and interest is interest and extrapolate what he will be leaving future generations for interest payments on debt...

Yeah, so you are basically expecting him, if you calculate those numbers, run them counter to the budget, calculate the interest and add it all up, that Obama is supposed to use the money to pay down the debt (and interest) accumulated, while also dealing effectively, responsibly and swiftly with 2 wars, an economic crisis and several pieces of legislature that ought to change the country.... and all that basically for free.

I am not american, I dont give a rats ass about what the budget does or does not, but at least SOME common sense, please, so it doesnt offend anyone with an as-of-yet sane disposition?

Around the clock, all I am seeing is: Obama didnt do this quickly, he doesnt do that swiftly, he hasnt yet done those things. But as soon as he is laying out a plan to actually finance some stuff, its all "booo, pay down the debt first, dont raise new debt, and make do with small change!". Which, even if he did that, would just revert to cries about being not efficient and fast enough.

Seriously, just say you hate the guy because he is the quarterback of the opponent of your favorite team, and nothing is ever going to change that, because you ll just drag up some other perspective to reinforce your opinion.

This barely is political discourse anymore, its sports, just with parties , not teams.

This thread got off to a good start.

Anyway, unless he somehow finds a way to deal with the cost of Social Security and Medicare there's really not a whole lot to yell at the guy about. Im sure that his Medicare and SS spending is off the charts compared to the 10 years prior, but thats obviously due to the whole baby boomer scenario. Can't really get mad at him for that.

ETA I just looked at that NYT chart, which was pretty helpful and confirmed my suspicions about the increases in spending. I read a story about how he's sneaking in some of his stimulus ideas into the budget, but were not talking about a dollar amount that would require us to get bent out of shape, IMO.

Debt is debt YT, if you add the numbers together you get our current national debt... off budget wars simply means they're not on the budget but they're still included in the annual deficits and then rolled over to the national debt. Same thing goes for 'stimulus' spending and omnibus spending bills. Anything aside from the budget that needs to be voted on for funding gets rolled up into the national deficit numbers, that's why it's so perposterous that Obama has a 1.2 trillion deficit for fiscal year 2011.. that's before any extra spending such as NEW stimulus bills, extra war efforts (like extra funding for Afghanistan) or newly created Health Care Bills or paying for the Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae or GM or Chrysler.. etc... etc...

Im gonna take a shot in the dark here...

90% top marginal income tax rate and higher corporate taxes?

Well, for starters he could have let the Bush tax cuts expire... like they were supposed to... that's a pretty big ticket item right there... but he kept them and increased spending.

This is true, but one of the things you want to avoid at all costs is raising taxes during a recession.

I have no problem with Clinton-era tax levels, but you gotta know when the right time to act is.

ETA Are you really upset that he didnt let them expire?

yes, actually.

This was the ONE chance, the absolute ONE chance at closing deficit levels without cost to politicians. The advantage being they were SET to expire. You can always promise new tax cuts come election time and then casually never deliver on them but it's awfully hard to campaign on "I will raise your taxes!"

So you're a "Three Cups of Tea" person, in addition to being a tinfoil hat lady now, yt?

Curious Rath. What's wrong with Greg Mortensen?

I admire Mortensen's work, but his book is a little too Ed Zwick for me.

Fair. Given the subject matter kind of hard to escape such characterizations though. All in all, more people should be a "Three Cups of Tea" person.

That is like saying "if everybody were a nice person, the world would not have so many problems". It might be true, but has little to do with reality.

I generally try to keep up with what's happening. Honestly, I have no fucking clue what the deal with the budget is.


I understand trillion $ + deficits, given the situation at hand. The Bush Administration was projecting a trillion dollar budget before Obama took the oath from that swinefucker Roberts. I can understand the lingering effects of the collapse and the wars also dictating massive budget deficits.

But I guess I'm old now, because I can remember when a Bush era $400 billion deficit seemed fucking huge and worth getting angry about. I have supported Obama pretty consistently since before he announced his candidacy, but I'd be clearly full of it if I pretended like this exploding budgetary death spiral didn't mean anything.

I think the really important question is: why are there trillion dollar deficits projected out for the next ten years? What, exactly, is blowing up spending like that, so hard? The main stream media has done a shit done explaining that because, again, I try pretty hard to keep ahead of these sorts of things. Even the Economist, my go-to source of knowledge when there are things I need to know that I will not like, has failed to really explicate this situation.

Are these trillion dollar static deficits the result of our collective failure to address social security and Medicare before the breaking point? If so, why isn't this being banged out loudly to the masses?

Or are these deficits largely the work of the Obama administration?

If it's the former, then that sort of speaks to my dread theory - that Obama is just the fall guy, and every vote I have cast in a national election is a fucking joke. But that sort of sounds like the paranoid fantasies of a tea-bagger, or a Ron Paul fanboy, and so I have resolutely tried to ignore that sort of mentality.

And if it's the latter - well, shit, it does seem rather impressive. To that point, I would like to see a breakdown of how the deficit actually compares to spending proposed by the Obama administration. That is the graphic that would really mean something, not the terror red lines of doom Sniake posted earlier (because as I said elsewhere, those damned lines wouldn't look any different if McCain had won).

What is the difference between what Obama inherited and what he's projecting?

P.S. I know a pretty easy way to shave a trillion dollars or so off those ugly horrific fucking lines in the next decade: repeal Medicaid part D and make old people pay for their own damn drugs.

For YT: tax rates reverting to what they were under Kennedy shouldn't be to catastrophic, but the potential addition to revenues would simply not be big enough. Closing corporate loopholes would be great, but we need to do that while simultaneously lowering the effective corporate tax rates. Too many other countries are offering lower tax rates not because we've raised ours, but because they've cut theirs aggressively. Except for investment banks. Tax those dogkillers into oblivion. Their profit-to-social-production ratio is just sickening. But so long as Summers and Geithner have pull, that sector of the economy won't ever pay what they need should be. Anyway, Sniake is right (ye gods) - Bush tax cuts should have been let to expire. Let Wall Street bitch - the total negative of the effect on the economy would never be as large as the media would initially try to portray it as. Long term: value added tax. Smash that through, take the political heat, become a one term president with BALLS. Be a fucking patriot.

Not my point at all.

Here's some food for thought. The difference between Bush's last budget and Obama's newest budget, when you take into account the 'collapse' is around $200 billion dollars in less receipts (meaning, less income).

Yet there is a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit projected, roughly 800 billion more then the year Bush held office before the 'collapse'.

Here's some more food for thought... Bush's last budget to congress was a then record breaking 3.1 trillion dollars (it ended up being closer to 2.97 trillion after everything was said and done...) Obama is putting forth a 3.86 trillion dollar budget roughly 800 billion more then Bush....

I guess we know where that 800 billion more in deficit spending came from.

doubt it? navigate this site and pull up everything I did.. I'd link it but it's mostly PDF's and XLS documents. It's a government site, not "heritage".

Now, as to the 'wars' dont' forget Obama is 'cutting spending'. Each budget he has cut spending to various departments yet each budget submitted increases.. that's because he has cut spending and used up those cuts by increasing spending elsewhere... at no point has the budget DECREASED.

As your reference to McCain? No, it would be different because McCain was proposing tax cuts and it would have never passed congress while Obama was proposing spending increases.. the non-partisan Tax Policy Center gave a write up of each candidate back during the election and when I said Obama would have trillion dollar deficits back in June of 2008, I referenced their site.. they were 100% right.

It was included in the year end deficits YT, that's because the year end deficits are a total account of how negative we are.

Let me help you understand since you've brought this up before..

A President submits a budget... this budget contains Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits. Now, once submitted to congress they can go through and make changes and then when passed it goes back to the President to approve. Now, once approved not one penny more can be spent on each budgetary item, if you want additional spending you need to go through a special congressional appropriation process. That is what happens each year.. that is why congress must approve spending bills such as during the Bush years, the wars.. and during the Obama years ADDITIONAL war spending on top of what he put on the budget. (such as the additional Afghanistan spending)

At the start of the process the projected deficit (or surplus) includes everything "on budget". At the end of the year the deficit (or surplus) includes both on budget items and off budget items. A perfect example is the current FY 2010 budget. Obama had projected a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit but through extra spending measures and a lack of receipts (this year is 400 billion short of FY 2008 receipts, some loss was budgeted) it has increased to 1.56 Trillion and the year isn't over yet.

Here's the big problem we're facing, Obama has increased government so much... it will become next to impossible to reduce it because in doing so, we will enter another recession and will take an even bigger pounding.

Here's government spending as percentage of GDP. Notice how it looks when Obama has taken over. *remember he took over in FY 2009 and approved a 410 billion omnibus spending bill for that FY, a bill Bush refused to sign*



feel free to look at the numbers yourself... http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...olor=c&local=c

You're just never going to learn this lesson, are you?

Yea, no point in even trying to reason with him. If you beat him, he just doesn't respond.

Please, enlighten me.

Well, you can go look in the Tea Party thread for one example where Richard Dickson basically proves you wrong and you just didn't respond to him. I've seen a pattern over the years where you make fairly outlandish statements, and when people counter you with actual "facts" (strange and alien to most Republicans), you just don't respond.

And who can forget when you referred to Sen. Kennedy as Ted "brain tumor" Kennedy. Classy and witty!

http://www.chud.com/forum/showpost.p...1&postcount=21

Gave him a response...

If I don't respond, 90% of the time it's because I don't see it... the other 10% is because I may not have time but when I do I usually circle back and reply.