You’ll recall Obama promising to “cut the deficit we inherited by half by the end of my first term in office.” (Note that many Americans probably heard that and thought he meant to cut the overall, outstanding, now $15.3 trillion debt, not the annual, more than $1 trillion per year deficit.)
You’ll also recall that in 2007, the deficit was… $160 billion. You know, about 12 percent of the total deficit Obama’s budget would create this year.
But, as you undoubtedly know, Obama hasn’t even come close to cutting the deficit in any significant way in any year of his presidency:
Fiscal 2009 budget deficit (technically the last year under Bush):$1.41 trillion.
2010 budget deficit: $1.3 trillion.
2011 budget deficit: $1.3 trillion.
2012 budget deficit projection in Obama’s numbers today: $1.33 trillion.
In the video above, Obama says, “In 2008 alone, we paid $258 billion in interest on debt, one in every ten taxpayer dollars. That is more than three times what we spent on education.”
We’re up to $169.2 billion in the first four months of this fiscal year. Again, we’re paying more in interest in the debt in the first four months of the year than the sum of the total deficit in 2007.
The plus side, I guess, with those interest payments our new command and control economy can't last for long. DC will have to give it all up sooner rather than later.
Hi Jim, you wrote "Fiscal 2009 budget deficit (technically the last year under Bush)"
Sorry, but you're wrong. The Fiscal 2009 budget was passed in 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The previous, Democrat controlled, Congress refused to pass a budget in 2008, because they thought they could get a bigger budget with President Obama than with President Bush.
The fiscal year 2009 budget, and budget deficit, is the responsibility of the Democrats, and of President Obama.
Hi Jim, you wrote "Fiscal 2009 budget deficit (technically the last year under Bush)"
Sorry, but you're wrong. The Fiscal 2009 budget was passed in 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The previous, Democrat controlled, Congress refused to pass a budget in 2008, because they thought they could get a bigger budget with President Obama than with President Bush.
The fiscal year 2009 budget, and budget deficit, is the responsibility of the Democrats, and of President Obama.
Given their apparent theory that none of the deficit is due to lowered revenues from a weak eeconomy, it's all "massive increases in spending"....could somebody on the Right give me a TRILLION dollars in spending cuts in the current fiscal budget. Not "over the next ten years" or concurrent with magical growth from a further tax cut for the rich "paying for itself in a few years"....but if they are truly concerned about our current deficits....
Give me spending cuts to match the deficit and reach a balanced budget...for this year. Right now. In specifics.
To get a balanced budget now we get cut to 1.3 trillion out of Obama's latest 2013 boondoggle budget. The following federal Cabinet level agencies had a 2010 budget of 1.441 trillion. I'm sure it's more now. These agencies are mostly a waste of money. They provide employment for federal bureaucrats and payoffs to special interest groups loved by the liberals. Eliminating them now would more than balance the budget and make America a stronger and more prosperous nation. The deadweight agencies are noted below:
Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor.
The link to their 2010 budgets is below. Notice I haven't named any of the important Cabinet agencies that actually perform useful services, but I'm sure some of their budgets be cut to.
From 2008 to 2009 revenues as a percentage of GDP fell 2.6% from 17.5% to 14.9%. While outlays increased 4.3 from 20.7 to 25%. The differential between revenues and outlays grew from -3.2% in 2008 to -10% in 2009. If you look at the actual FY2005 adjusted dollars in terms of revenues you'll see that the federal gov't was pulling in roughly the same tax receipts in 2009 (1,898 billion) as it was in 2003 (1,901.1 billion) which was during the recessionary slump during the Bush term. Yet the differential in terms of revenues versus outlays in 2003 was -3.4. I mean there isn't much other way you can look at this. It's all simple math of adding and subtracting single digits percentages and it all shows that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem. Since Obama has been in office we've essentially had a 1 trillion dollar stimulus injected into mostly the public sector economy for each of the 3 years of his presidency. If you want to know how we can easily cut 1 trillion dollars from the budget well my answer is vote Obama out and get some people into Congress who actually seem interested in passing a formalized budget. At this point even just getting back to revenue vs. outlay differentials of 3% would be a godsend. The problem is we have have the most irresponsible person in the world holding onto our collective credit card and he seems so far to be unable to bring himself to stop maxing it out every year.
The plus side, I guess, with those interest payments our new command and control economy can't last for long. DC will have to give it all up sooner rather than later.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHi Jim, you wrote "Fiscal 2009 budget deficit (technically the last year under Bush)"
Sorry, but you're wrong. The Fiscal 2009 budget was passed in 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The previous, Democrat controlled, Congress refused to pass a budget in 2008, because they thought they could get a bigger budget with President Obama than with President Bush.
The fiscal year 2009 budget, and budget deficit, is the responsibility of the Democrats, and of President Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseHi Jim, you wrote "Fiscal 2009 budget deficit (technically the last year under Bush)"
Sorry, but you're wrong. The Fiscal 2009 budget was passed in 2009, and signed into law by President Barack Obama. The previous, Democrat controlled, Congress refused to pass a budget in 2008, because they thought they could get a bigger budget with President Obama than with President Bush.
The fiscal year 2009 budget, and budget deficit, is the responsibility of the Democrats, and of President Obama.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGiven their apparent theory that none of the deficit is due to lowered revenues from a weak eeconomy, it's all "massive increases in spending"....could somebody on the Right give me a TRILLION dollars in spending cuts in the current fiscal budget. Not "over the next ten years" or concurrent with magical growth from a further tax cut for the rich "paying for itself in a few years"....but if they are truly concerned about our current deficits....
Give me spending cuts to match the deficit and reach a balanced budget...for this year. Right now. In specifics.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTo get a balanced budget now we get cut to 1.3 trillion out of Obama's latest 2013 boondoggle budget. The following federal Cabinet level agencies had a 2010 budget of 1.441 trillion. I'm sure it's more now. These agencies are mostly a waste of money. They provide employment for federal bureaucrats and payoffs to special interest groups loved by the liberals. Eliminating them now would more than balance the budget and make America a stronger and more prosperous nation. The deadweight agencies are noted below:
Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor.
The link to their 2010 budgets is below. Notice I haven't named any of the important Cabinet agencies that actually perform useful services, but I'm sure some of their budgets be cut to.
External Link
Lewis Forro
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseVirginia Beach, VA
From 2008 to 2009 revenues as a percentage of GDP fell 2.6% from 17.5% to 14.9%. While outlays increased 4.3 from 20.7 to 25%. The differential between revenues and outlays grew from -3.2% in 2008 to -10% in 2009. If you look at the actual FY2005 adjusted dollars in terms of revenues you'll see that the federal gov't was pulling in roughly the same tax receipts in 2009 (1,898 billion) as it was in 2003 (1,901.1 billion) which was during the recessionary slump during the Bush term. Yet the differential in terms of revenues versus outlays in 2003 was -3.4. I mean there isn't much other way you can look at this. It's all simple math of adding and subtracting single digits percentages and it all shows that we have a spending problem not a revenue problem. Since Obama has been in office we've essentially had a 1 trillion dollar stimulus injected into mostly the public sector economy for each of the 3 years of his presidency. If you want to know how we can easily cut 1 trillion dollars from the budget well my answer is vote Obama out and get some people into Congress who actually seem interested in passing a formalized budget. At this point even just getting back to revenue vs. outlay differentials of 3% would be a godsend. The problem is we have have the most irresponsible person in the world holding onto our collective credit card and he seems so far to be unable to bring himself to stop maxing it out every year.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse2007 was the last year the GOP made the budget.
Its deficit is almost one tenth the size of Obama + Democrats first budget( FY2009).
Thank goodness the 52% voted in Pelosi and Reid.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThanks for the clip of the President promising to cut spending.
To highlight the obvious reality today, wouldn't it have also been helpful to splice the the E-Trade baby, saying "Wait, here's my shocked face?"
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse