View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Fri Mar 20, 2009 5:57 pm Post subject: Dems in Congress + Dem President = RECORD DEFICIT! |
|
|
http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/03/20/cbo-us-deficit-ballooning-to-record-19-trillion/
Quote: |
On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said this year�s budget deficit is now nearly $1.7 trillion, more than $400 billion larger than it forecast two months ago. Next year�s deficit will be nearly $1.1 trillion, $430 billion more than its prior forecast. And that doesn�t count President Obama�s budget plans to cut taxes and increase spending. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder why? Could it be less revenue? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
pkang0202

Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 1:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Kuros wrote: |
I wonder why? Could it be less revenue? |
Really? I would've thought the 800 Billion dollar stimulus + corporate bailouts was the cause.
I like how the Stimulus package just stimulates Obama's Social plan, but does nothing to actually Stimulate the economy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
greedy_bones

Joined: 01 Jul 2007 Location: not quite sure anymore
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
So, the recession started after Obama took office? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
greedy_bones

Joined: 01 Jul 2007 Location: not quite sure anymore
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
Really? I would've thought the 800 Billion dollar stimulus + corporate bailouts was the cause.
|
There was no stimulus package or corporate bailout under the Bush administration? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:27 am Post subject: Re: Dems in Congress + Dem President = RECORD DEFICIT! |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/03/20/cbo-us-deficit-ballooning-to-record-19-trillion/
Quote: |
On Friday, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said this year�s budget deficit is now nearly $1.7 trillion, more than $400 billion larger than it forecast two months ago. Next year�s deficit will be nearly $1.1 trillion, $430 billion more than its prior forecast. And that doesn�t count President Obama�s budget plans to cut taxes and increase spending. |
|
So by your logic Republicans in Congress + Republican President = September 11th  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Bill Moyers calls the stimulus bill the "lobbyist enrichment act".
Even if you like the Obama, you still have to be critical. But that said, the deficit emerged in the second (third?) year of the Bush administration. Even if the economy wasn't totally fucked, it would be almost impossible for Obama to get rid of it in one year. Given that the economy is severely contracting, and that the trend of official government economic thought (from both ends of both parties, less Ron Paul) is pro "stimulus" there is little reason to believe a McCain government would have done differently. But this does not excuse bad policy.
The major problem now is not exactly who is in charge, but a set of ideas that seem to have found a home in all the "official" people. But against Obama, he went and picked the same set of bankster assholes (just a different face) that were using Bush to bailout their firms to advise him. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
pkang0202 wrote: |
Kuros wrote: |
I wonder why? Could it be less revenue? |
Really? I would've thought the 800 Billion dollar stimulus + corporate bailouts was the cause. |
40% of the stimulus were tax cuts proposed by the GOP. The corporate bailouts were done under TARP, introduced by the Bush administration.
I'm not happy with Obama so far, but we've been in deficit mode since the year after Bush took office. Except that now we have a massive recession. Your point is really, really weak. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|