June 30, 2010

CBO: Deficit To Reach 62% This Year; But Don't Fear, It Will Stabilize At 67%
— Ace

Actually it could go to 90% if current spending levels are maintained (plus inflation) and the Bush tax cuts are extended.

Hm, I wonder, I do wonder, which of those two Obama will choose to abandon.

By contrast, GDP has averaged "a little above" 36 percent per year over the past 40 years.

Posted by: Ace at 05:46 AM | Comments (23)
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.

1 "...and the Bush tax cuts are NOT extended" is what you meant, no?

Posted by: Milesdei at June 30, 2010 05:48 AM (FS9ko)

2 Gird your loins!

Posted by: Rickshaw Jack at June 30, 2010 05:49 AM (bPkzf)

3 ...and all the media seizes on "blame Bush for the tax cuts!" and don't even mention "growth in appropriations."  Sigh.

Posted by: HeatherRadish at June 30, 2010 05:51 AM (mR7mk)

4 Read the "impartial" CBO is laying the groundwork for tax increases. Surprised?

Posted by: Donna at June 30, 2010 05:52 AM (z3whe)

5 Monty?

Posted by: motionview at June 30, 2010 05:52 AM (lKDF0)

6 "...and the Bush tax cuts are NOT extended" is what you meant, no?

Well, that's what the article says--if the Bush tax cuts are extended.  Situation won't happen if Congress extends the Bush tax plan (I like that verbiage better) AND cuts spending, but who realistically expects them to do the latter?

Posted by: HeatherRadish at June 30, 2010 05:55 AM (mR7mk)

7 1 "...and the Bush tax cuts are NOT extended" is what you meant, no?

Posted by: Milesdei at June 30, 2010 10:48 AM (FS9ko)


Remember, this is a CBO study; they use the inputs and assumptions Congress gives them. If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, the CBO assumes the increased tax rates will not have a dampening effect on the economy - which is nonsense, of course.

This is all part of the prep work for letting the tax cuts expire (we need the money!) and raising other taxes. Just like that Potemkin village "bipartisan" commission they created and stocked with Commies and RINOs.

Taxes will be going up until a new congress is sworn in. If I had any money, I'd bet on it.

Posted by: Josef K. at June 30, 2010 05:55 AM (7+pP9)

8 Oh, and spending cuts? Only for the military. And aid to Israel.

Posted by: Josef K. at June 30, 2010 05:57 AM (7+pP9)

9
No, Ace has it right.

Tax cuts mean less revenue, in this case, which leads to greater deficits.

Posted by: a proud ewaster at June 30, 2010 05:59 AM (uFokq)

10 Yeah, but we have a recovery!!!!  There is no recession!!!!  You don't understand!!!!  You're all defending Strom Thurmond!!!!

Posted by: Ben (dover) at June 30, 2010 06:00 AM (pUfK9)

11
hahaha, look what I found in the ol' memory hole.
------------------------------------------------------

Biden predicted today that the economy will add between 100,000-200,000 jobs next month, and between 250,000-500,000 jobs per month in time thereafter.

"All in all we're going to be creating somewhere between 100 and 200,000 jobs next month, I predict," Biden said.

Biden added that he's "got in trouble" for a previous job growth prediction in March.

"Even some in the White House said, 'hey, don't get ahead of yourself,'" said Biden. "Well I'm here to tell you some time in the next couple of months we're going to be creating between 250,000 jobs a month and 500,000 jobs a month. Because I'm telling you something, folks. We caught a lot of bad breaks on the way down. We're going to catch a few good breaks because of good planning on the way up."


Posted by: a proud ewaster at June 30, 2010 06:04 AM (uFokq)

12
fuck you, html

Posted by: i like chubby asian chicks, i do at June 30, 2010 06:05 AM (uFokq)

13

Let's not conflate tax cuts with tax rate cuts, as proud dishonest types like to do.

Increasing tax rates (or "letting tax rate cuts expire" if you insist) always has the effect of depressing the private economy because it necessarily takes more money out of the private economy.  Depressing the private economy, in turn, has the effect of decreasing actual tax revenues.  This is fundamental economics, which everyone knows, even the dishonest libs in Congress and the MSM.

Posted by: Bender at June 30, 2010 06:05 AM (pLTLS)

14
Joe Biden said that on April 23, 2010, btw.

That guy is a major league asshole. Biden has never been on the right side of an issue in all his years in *spit* public service. Wrong about everything.

Wrong Way Joe Biden, is what we should call him.

Posted by: i like chubby asian chicks, i do at June 30, 2010 06:08 AM (uFokq)

15 Typical media reporting.  Go read at LEAST the summary at http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/115xx/doc11579/SummaryforWeb_LTBO.pdf  The prediction is the BEST CASE of the two scenarios they looked at, the one reported is IF ALL BUSH CUTS EXPIRE.  It uses the ObamaCare costs they drummed up during the debate, not the revisions since.  No Doc fix to Medicare.  Tax collections going up to 23% of GDP. And the article only talks about the effect on the next 10 years, not the 25 years in the report (going up to 80%).  Under the alternative scenario, debt would reach 185% of GDP by 2035.

And keep in mind, they are only talking about debt held by the public, not total national debt which would make the numbers even scarier.  This is just another happy face article.

Moo

Posted by: SacredCow at June 30, 2010 06:24 AM (J0SHd)

16 The CBO is a political organization and has NEVER been accurate in anything.

Posted by: Vic at June 30, 2010 06:39 AM (6taRI)

17 Gross Debt is already over 90%. Do not fall for the debt held by the public nonsense that the media is putting out to you.

Posted by: Dan at June 30, 2010 06:54 AM (1jzSs)

18 #22 is correct. Total sovereign debt is $13 trillion. GDP is about $14 trillion. That's over 90%. The following link shows the numbers but also reports the debt to GDP ratio at 60% - it appears that they, and the CBO, back out "securities held by Federal trust funds" whatever that is.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/#

Also - the headline here at Ace incorrectly denotes the report being about deficits whereas it's actually about the accumulated national debt. FWIW this year's deficit will be $1.6 trillion or about 13% of GDP.

Posted by: Fred at June 30, 2010 07:14 AM (KHAc5)

19 it appears that they, and the CBO, back out "securities held by Federal trust funds" whatever that is.

That's printed money, essentially, both of the monetary type and of the fiscal type (social security obligations, etc.).  Those sorts of debt are even more dangerous than that held by real people and entities.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at June 30, 2010 07:21 AM (Qp4DT)

20 This is about the DEBT.  Not the DEFICIT, as your post claims.  Gigantic, earth-shattering difference between the two.  Please fix.

Posted by: Cory at June 30, 2010 08:02 AM (THLN4)

21 This is about the DEBT.  Not the DEFICIT, as your post claims.  Gigantic, earth-shattering difference between the two.  Please fix.

Posted by: Cory at June 30, 2010 01:02 PM (THLN4)

To be more accurate, it's about the Debt-to-GDP Ratio.  Which means in addition to Ace's headline and post not making any sense, the quote including "GDP averaged... 36%" also doesn't make sense.

Posted by: jarod at June 30, 2010 01:07 PM (SN4+f)

22 the last time we had this kind of deficit the top tax rate was 80+% and we were able to kust about pay off the entire national debt in a short time. What do you think the chances are the very very wealthy will do the same now ?

Posted by: Denny Crane at June 30, 2010 01:27 PM (I+7Zv)

23 What do you think the chances are the very very wealthy will do the same now ?

Zero.  This time, there are a lot of places that aren't bombed out wastelands for the wealthy to take their wealth to.



and STFU, dunce.

Posted by: toby928 at June 30, 2010 02:45 PM (4WbTI)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
82kb generated in CPU 0.06, elapsed 1.0199 seconds.
62 queries taking 0.9812 seconds, 259 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.