PDA

View Full Version : Obama's $9.3 Trillion Deficit



RedEj8
03-21-2009, 01:46 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_budget

Obama budget could bring $9.3 trillion in deficits
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer
Fri Mar 20, 7:43 pm ET

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush's presidency, congressional auditors said Friday.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama's budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It's a prospect even the president's own budget director called unsustainable.

In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By CBO's calculation, Obama's budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama's policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

White House budget chief Peter Orszag said that CBO's long-range economic projections are more pessimistic than those of the White House, private economists and the Federal Reserve and that he remained confident that Obama's budget, if enacted, would produce smaller deficits.

Even so, Orszag acknowledged that if the CBO projections prove accurate, Obama's budget would produce deficits that could not be sustained.

"Deficits in the, let's say, 5 percent of GDP range would lead to rising debt-to-GDP ratios that would ultimately not be sustainable," Orszag told reporters.

Deficits so big put upward pressure on interest rates as the government offers more attractive interest rates to attract borrowers.

"I think deficits of 5 percent (of GDP) are unsupportable," said economist Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "It will lead to higher interest rates to the point where it will force policymakers to make changes."

Republicans immediately piled on.

"This report should serve as the wake-up call this administration needs," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio. "We simply cannot continue to mortgage our children and grandchildren's future to pay for bigger and more costly government."

But Obama insisted on Friday that his agenda is still on track.

"What we will not cut are investments that will lead to real growth and prosperity over the long term," Obama said. "That's why our budget makes a historic commitment to comprehensive health care reform. That's why it enhances America's competitiveness by reducing our dependence on foreign oil and building a clean energy economy."

Obama's $3.6 trillion budget for the 2010 fiscal year beginning Oct. 1 contains ambitious programs to overhaul the U.S. health care system and initiate new "cap-and-trade" rules to combat global warming.

Both initiatives involve raising federal revenues sharply higher, but those dollars wouldn't be used to defray the burgeoning deficit and would instead help pay for Obama's health plan and implement Obama's $400 tax credit for most workers and $800 for couples.

Obama's budget promises to cut the deficit to $533 billion in five years. The CBO says the red ink for that year will total $672 billion.

Most disturbing to Obama allies like Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., are the longer term projections, which climb above $1 trillion again by the end of the next decade and approach 6 percent of GDP by 2019.

Among about a dozen major changes to Obama's budget, Conrad is looking to curb Obama's 9 percent increase for non-defense appropriations to show short-term progress and insists that the long-term deficit and debt crisis will have to be addressed via a special bipartisan commission.

"The budget that I'll submit will cut the deficit by more than two-thirds over these first five years," Conrad. "These imbalances are just absolutely unsustainable."

The worsening economy is responsible for the even deeper fiscal mess inherited by Obama. As an illustration, CBO says the deficit for the current budget year, which began Oct. 1, will top $1.8 trillion, $93 billion more than foreseen by the White House. That would equal 13 percent of GDP, a level not seen since World War II.

The 2009 deficit, fueled by the $700 billion Wall Street bailout and diving tax revenues stemming from the worsening recession, is four times the previous $459 billion record set just last year.

The CBO's estimate for 2010 is worse as well, with a deficit of almost $1.4 trillion expected under administration policies, about $200 billion more than predicted by Obama.

Long-term deficit predictions have proven notoriously fickle — George W. Bush inherited flawed projections of a 10-year, $5.6 trillion surplus and instead produced record deficits — and if the economy outperforms CBO's expectations, the deficits could prove significantly smaller.

Republicans say Obama's budget plan taxes, spends and borrows too much, and they've been sharply critical of his $787 billion economic stimulus measure and a just-passed $410 billion omnibus spending bill that awarded big increases to domestic agency budgets.

The administration says it inherited deficits totaling $9 trillion over the next decade and that its budget plan cuts $2 trillion from those deficits. But most of those spending reductions come from reducing costs for the war in Iraq.
__________________________________________________ ______________

Bush's presidency is starting to look like a pinprick.

.::UNKNOWN::.
03-24-2009, 04:05 AM
hell people bitched about the deficits bush gave us over 8 years wtf is this

stephen
03-24-2009, 05:57 AM
lol....that's a funny article. I like how certain shit is bolded, but certain phrases aren't. for instance, the words COULD, PROBABLY,WOULD & I definitely love the phrase "if they prove to be accurate." considering the fact that the author sucks at math (9.3 trillion IS NOT 4 times more than 11 trillion...the deficit left by bush), & wasted time writing about PROBABILITY (minority report is probably his favorite movie) I wouldn't pay too much attention to this worthless article.

I love how writers, economist, reporters, etc. love to bash obama's strategy (one he's ONLY been working on for roughly 60 days), but don't offer solutions of their own. here's what else I don't get...if they can forsee 10yrs from now (after only 60 days) the why didn't they see an 11trillion dollar deficit after bush burned through our surplus during his FIRST TERM & FIRST YEAR????

AirMax95
03-24-2009, 08:10 AM
lol....that's a funny article. I like how certain shit is bolded, but certain phrases aren't. for instance, the words COULD, PROBABLY,WOULD & I definitely love the phrase "if they prove to be accurate." considering the fact that the author sucks at math (9.3 trillion IS NOT 4 times more than 11 trillion...the deficit left by bush), & wasted time writing about PROBABILITY (minority report is probably his favorite movie) I wouldn't pay too much attention to this worthless article.

I love how writers, economist, reporters, etc. love to bash obama's strategy (one he's ONLY been working on for roughly 60 days), but don't offer solutions of their own. here's what else I don't get...if they can forsee 10yrs from now (after only 60 days) the why didn't they see an 11trillion dollar deficit after bush burned through our surplus during his FIRST TERM & FIRST YEAR????

It's all a blame game to a beast that require trial and error; hence why I despise politics and frustrates me to have a debate about. I have been asked to participate in a campaign for someone running for Mayor this year. I am going to do it mainly for the experience, but more for the chance to make an impact from my mind of twisted simplicity.

Everytime I come in here and read someting from Mike, Tony, yourself, RedGT and others who post facts I get pissed. Why? You guys all post valid points, but there is not a cut and dry to fixing most major economic problems. I love the quoute "The market will fix itself, as proven historically". That is the biggest crockpot of shit that grandma cooked in the bayou. It's a scape goat b/c there is not 1 or 2 ways to fix things. Some sector will suffer and every President will get backlash during or after his/her presidency.

Get rid of the greed and selfishness, then roll the dice again.

SL65AMG
03-24-2009, 08:41 AM
lol....that's a funny article. I like how certain shit is bolded, but certain phrases aren't. for instance, the words COULD, PROBABLY,WOULD & I definitely love the phrase "if they prove to be accurate." considering the fact that the author sucks at math (9.3 trillion IS NOT 4 times more than 11 trillion...the deficit left by bush), & wasted time writing about PROBABILITY (minority report is probably his favorite movie) I wouldn't pay too much attention to this worthless article.

I love how writers, economist, reporters, etc. love to bash obama's strategy (one he's ONLY been working on for roughly 60 days), but don't offer solutions of their own. here's what else I don't get...if they can forsee 10yrs from now (after only 60 days) the why didn't they see an 11trillion dollar deficit after bush burned through our surplus during his FIRST TERM & FIRST YEAR????


last time i checked Bush didnt create ALL of our debt.... we still were in hole for TRILLIONS of dollars before Bush ever took office. Bush supposedly created about 4 trillion dollars of debt for the US.... thats 500 billion per year


obama has spent hundreds of billions of dollars already in the 80 or so days hes been in office.....


you do the math.....




i want a money tree..... Obama apparently has one

BB6dohcvtec
03-24-2009, 01:43 PM
and everybody knows why he spent hundreds of billions of dollars in the first 80 days or so. I would rather be in a huge defecit than sit by idlely for the next decade plus wondering when we are going to get ourselves out of this like Japan.

F8d2Blk
03-24-2009, 02:28 PM
and everybody knows why he spent hundreds of billions of dollars in the first 80 days or so. I would rather be in a huge defecit than sit by idlely for the next decade plus wondering when we are going to get ourselves out of this like Japan.


So why do you think he spent billions of dollars and what did those dollars go to?

stephen
03-24-2009, 02:35 PM
last time i checked Bush didnt create ALL of our debt.... we still were in hole for TRILLIONS of dollars before Bush ever took office. Bush supposedly created about 4 trillion dollars of debt for the US.... thats 500 billion per year


obama has spent hundreds of billions of dollars already in the 80 or so days hes been in office.....


you do the math.....




i want a money tree..... Obama apparently has one

*sigh*....ok man. you're right, we've ALWAYS been in debt (prior to bush). let's use your "choice" word SUPPOSEDLY, and pretend as if it were real. the point is....HE LEFT OVER A $10T DEBT, HIGHEST RATE OF FORECLOSURES (since who knows when), HIGHEST RATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT (in like 20yrs), AND CONTINUED TO SPEND $12B PER MONTH IN IRAQ (a country that DIDN'T even attack us).

that's a huge difference than ASSUMING obama is going to leave us with a $9.3T debt after 60 days. SHAME ON OBAMA FOR SPENDING BILLIONS ALREADY TO TRY TO DIG US OUT OF THIS MESS! who does he think he is...a president that received an economically destroyed country!?!

lol, i can't believe some of you are putting so much value on a PREDICTION. i'm sure someone is going to come in here and talk about "it's not bush" fault, clinton left the housing bubble." give me a break...dude had 8yrs to find and rectify that shit...and he did absolutely nothing but spend spend spend, and reduce taxes. that's like quitting your job and going on a shopping spree.

before i do the math, how about you do a little bit of research on FACTS. i'd hate for you to start freaking out when someone writes an article about "obama might have dinner with the klingons."

AirMax95
03-24-2009, 02:38 PM
So why do you think he spent billions of dollars and what did those dollars go to?

I take it you did not read/glance/view the bill.

BB6dohcvtec
03-24-2009, 02:47 PM
So why do you think he spent billions of dollars and what did those dollars go to?

I'm not even replying to that.