• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Attention: Deficit!

WildCat said:
If government had been more responsible in the past it would have been in a much better position to stimulate itself out of a recession.
Click to expand...

I agree. Many of us Keynsians were decrying the Bush tax cuts when the economy was doing well. When the economy is growing decently, *that's* when you want to run surpluses and pay down the debt. Then in times of crisis (recessions, major wars), you can borrow.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
I agree. Many of us Keynsians were decrying the Bush tax cuts when the economy was doing well. When the economy is growing decently, *that's* when you want to run surpluses and pay down the debt. Then in times of crisis (recessions, major wars), you can borrow.
Click to expand...

Yes, Bush and the GOP did the exact opposite of what was good for the country.

If they were more intelligent, I would begin to think this was the purpose; to bankrupt us.
 
BenBurch said:
And the ONLY way out of this mess is for us to GET a filibuster-proof majority or to vote the Senate back to "regular order" and force all filibusters to be carried out by an actual Senator reading Atlas Shrugged into the record or similar - you'd be amazed at how easy it is to break a filibuster like that 4-5 days on.
Click to expand...

Hard to do that with a 3 day work week.
 
BenBurch said:
Yes, Bush and the GOP did the exact opposite of what was good for the country.

If they were more intelligent, I would begin to think this was the purpose; to bankrupt us.
Click to expand...

Basicly yes. Debt is good for republicans for some reason so they want their to be more of it so they can run against it.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
Then in times of crisis (recessions, major wars, reelection campaigns...), you can borrow.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, politicians tend to see the world with the addition shown above in bold.

The rotten thing is that it works. We vote for these clowns when they promise less work for more pay.
 
Tricky said:
Is it time to do something about this?

Budget office projects U.S. deficit to hit $477 billion

In its annual wintertime economic outlook, lawmakers' nonpartisan fiscal analyst also estimated that the deficit would ease to $362 billion in 2005, according to numbers obtained by The Associated Press.

The budget office also estimated that deficits for the decade ending in 2013 would total nearly $2.4 trillion. The August report foresaw deficits totaling $1.4 trillion over 10 years.
Click to expand...

Is the sheer size of these numbers causing people to become numbed to them? How long can we continue to rack up such debt before we hit the wall?

Hard to believe that we had a surplus when this decade started. And it's getting worse. The projected deficit for the next decade has nearly doubled since August. Oh, but consumer confidence is up, so we're okay.
Click to expand...

Seems that forecast was a bit optimistic. Adding up the numbers I found here, I get $6.165 trillion for the decade.

They obviously didn't know there would be a major financial crisis that would cause the most severe recession since the Great Depression, so it's understandable.
 
Puppycow said:
They obviously didn't know there would be a major financial crisis that would cause the most severe recession since the Great Depression, so it's understandable.
Click to expand...

I think that's probably optimistic, in itself. Reasonable, maybe, but I think few people will be understand about that kind delta while Obama is president.
 
Puppycow said:
Seems that forecast was a bit optimistic. Adding up the numbers I found here, I get $6.165 trillion for the decade.

They obviously didn't know there would be a major financial crisis that would cause the most severe recession since the Great Depression, so it's understandable.
Click to expand...

This reminds me of Nassim Taleb (author of The Black Swan), interrupting a presentation at Davos about five and ten year financial projections and demanding to see the presenter's previous projections that were accurate.

It's easy enough to blame Bush and Cheney, and they certainly deserve it. Let's not forget though that Congress could have (and should have) exercised some measure of fiscal responsibility and shut down this madness. Ultimately the blame falls on the American people though. We loudly demanded more government and more wars, and fewer taxes to pay for it. I can't help but conclude that we have the outcome we deserve.
 
ravdin said:
This reminds me of Nassim Taleb (author of The Black Swan), interrupting a presentation at Davos about five and ten year financial projections and demanding to see the presenter's previous projections that were accurate.

It's easy enough to blame Bush and Cheney, and they certainly deserve it. Let's not forget though that Congress could have (and should have) exercised some measure of fiscal responsibility and shut down this madness. Ultimately the blame falls on the American people though. We loudly demanded more government and more wars, and fewer taxes to pay for it. I can't help but conclude that we have the outcome we deserve.
Click to expand...

I don't think that analogy is completely accurate, and not just because I don't like being blamed for things.

I didn't have a hand in the individual decisions that were made to result in our current fiscal situation. Hell, to be honest, I didn't even vote, which is why I'm not bitching about it right now. If I had voted then I'd have more of a leg to stand on. However, we put people in power to make those decisions because they're "supposed" to be the individuals with knowledge on the way our country operates behind the scenes. I guess I also don't know too many people who loudly demanded more wars. Then again, I live in North Dakota where we don't really loudly demand much. I met a few people who moderately requested no war. I don't think many people were behind the Iraq war at least.
 
Puppycow said:
Seems that forecast was a bit optimistic. Adding up the numbers I found here, I get $6.165 trillion for the decade.

They obviously didn't know there would be a major financial crisis that would cause the most severe recession since the Great Depression, so it's understandable.
Click to expand...

Are you talking Deficit or Debt, cause these are different things.

The Deficit in 2013 (est) will be around $900 billion, not $6.165 Trillion.
 
Upchurch said:
I think that's probably optimistic, in itself. Reasonable, maybe, but I think few people will be understand about that kind delta while Obama is president.
Click to expand...

Really?

Clinton inherited a $290 billion deficit from Bush Snr, and over 8 years turned it into a $236 Billion surplus, this gaining +$526 Billion over his 8 years in office.

Obama was handed a $1.4 Trillion Hospital Pass, and has since got this down to $900 Billion, an improvement of +$500 Billion over 6 years during one of the biggest depressions ever. Projections are that the deficit will continue to drop and even may even go into surplus in the next few years if the economy continues to improve.

Compare this to the last Republican Presidents....

Bush Jr: -$690 Billion in 8 years
Bush Snr: -$135 Billion in 4 years
Regan: -$82 Billion in 8 years
 
Fudbucker said:
The deficit for FY 2013, was $680 billion, which is less than half of what it was four years ago. The CBO has the deficit dropping to $350 billion (2 points of GDP) by 2016.
http://money.cnn.com/2013/10/30/news/economy/deficit-2013-treasury/index.html
Click to expand...

I was using an estimated figure, but that's even better, it puts Obama on +$780, and if he did get it to $350 billion in 2016, it'd actually be 100 billion lower then Bush's last year in 2008 before the massacre budget of 2009. That'd be an astounding feat.
 
ravdin said:
This reminds me of Nassim Taleb (author of The Black Swan), interrupting a presentation at Davos about five and ten year financial projections and demanding to see the presenter's previous projections that were accurate.
Click to expand...

Taleb! Isn't that the guy who in 2009 predicted hyperinflation? :boxedin:
 
PhantomWolf said:
I was using an estimated figure, but that's even better, it puts Obama on +$780, and if he did get it to $350 billion in 2016, it'd actually be 100 billion lower then Bush's last year in 2008 before the massacre budget of 2009. That'd be an astounding feat.
Click to expand...

If the economy is growing around 3% (as it currently is), and the deficit is less than Bush's were, and Obamacare has 15 million people covered (which is an extremely low estimate), and 30 states allow gay marriage, what on Earth is the GOP going to run on in 2016? Abortion?
 
Fudbucker said:
If the economy is growing around 3% (as it currently is), and the deficit is less than Bush's were, and Obamacare has 15 million people covered (which is an extremely low estimate), and 30 states allow gay marriage, what on Earth is the GOP going to run on in 2016? Abortion?
Click to expand...

Rolling the clock back to 1950?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom