The WSJ cutting through the lies…
Before Obama had even lifted a finger, the CBO was already projecting that the federal deficit would rise to $1.2 trillion in fiscal 2009. The government actually spent less money in 2009 than it was projected to, but the deficit expanded to $1.4 trillion because revenue from taxes fell much further than expected, due to the weak economy and the emergency tax cuts that were part of the stimulus bill.
The projected deficit for the 2010-13 period has grown from an expected $1.7 trillion in January 2009 to $4.4 trillion today. Lower-than-forecast revenue accounts for 73% of the $2.7 trillion increase in the expected deficit. That’s assuming that the Bush and Obama tax cuts are repealed completely.
When Obama took the oath of office, the $789 billion bank bailout had already been approved. Federal spending on unemployment benefits, food stamps and Medicare was already surging to meet the dire unemployment crisis that was well underway. See the CBO’s January 2009 budget outlook.
Obama is not responsible for that increase, though he is responsible (along with the Congress) for about $140 billion in extra spending in the 2009 fiscal year from the stimulus bill, from the expansion of the children’s health-care program and from other appropriations bills passed in the spring of 2009.
If we attribute that $140 billion in stimulus to Obama and not to Bush, we find that spending under Obama grew by about $200 billion over four years, amounting to a 1.4% annualized increase.
After adjusting for inflation, spending under Obama is falling at a 1.4% annual pace — the first decline in real spending since the early 1970s, when Richard Nixon was retreating from the quagmire in Vietnam.
In per capita terms, real spending will drop by nearly 5% from $11,450 per person in 2009 to $10,900 in 2013 (measured in 2009 dollars).
- Well. Three "Pinocchios" from the Washington Post.
-
So, it's all about the "growth?" What about the actual amount?
-
We're getting decreases in real terms.
-
Go look at that -CBO budget analysis- and tell me where we are in ten years.
-
you're ignoring the point
-
They don't care, Buck.
-
Someday you might have to sit down and consider what the term "transfer" actually means.
-
Someday you may want to consider issues. When the rich become richer there is a transfer. Why do ...
-
"When the rich become richer there is a transfer."
-
Doesn't pass any test at all. Here's the test for you.
- Well, leave it to me, I don't know what it means Tom...please explain. Thank you!
-
Doesn't pass any test at all. Here's the test for you.
-
"When the rich become richer there is a transfer."
-
Someday you may want to consider issues. When the rich become richer there is a transfer. Why do ...
-
Someday you might have to sit down and consider what the term "transfer" actually means.
- You're "stuck on stupid."
-
They don't care, Buck.
-
you're ignoring the point
-
Go look at that -CBO budget analysis- and tell me where we are in ten years.
-
We're getting decreases in real terms.