It’s Official: 2012 Deficit Was $1.087T; $1T+ All 4 Yrs of Obama’s 1st Term

That really does paint a pretty picture doesn't it, the republicans
really are horrible and the democrats really are horrible as well,
neither of them can be trusted with doing thing in a responsible
well thought out manner, neither of them have the best interest
of the general public at heart.

I love how in his own words he is even a failure, for me this just
flat out proves the party system is a waste of our time and
effort, we need major overhauls in our government, we need to
bring it back in line with we the people not we the government.

Those who still fail to see that while debt and deficit are two
different things but one is reliant on the other are just blowing
smoke at this point, fact are facts and you can deny them all you
like but reality speaks and it speaks of a HUGE amount of debt,
no matter how you slice it, from the failure of obamacare to the
failure of his financial policies.

There again they are all in this together, they all decide so i say
we blame every sitting member of congress and the senate as
well oh and the supreme court also as they seem to just not give
a flick about the utter shredding of our constitution and the rights
of the people.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by aoxomoxoa

 

What is the deficit now?

16.7 Trillion dollars.

Explain how this is less than 8 trillion dollars.

16.7 is DEBT. Deficit is how much on adds on in a year, somewhat different thing. But the OP seems right, the article linked to links to the CBO report that shows just that, a trillion a year deficit last 4 years. Popeye dude makes a point defending Obama that is also valid, talking about percent of GDP I think? But that makes things more scary. The only way for the deficit to be going up and up, and for it to mean less and less is inflation, meaning the dollar is becoming devalued.

Originally posted by links234
You guys just keep your fingers in your ears

Right back atchya. I challenge you to READ THE LINKS. The charts and stats
are all there. The country is worse off now under Obama than Bush43 or Clinton or anyone
else. Take a long hard look at employment numbers and how full time employees are
having their jobs cut to part time to deal with Obamacare. I double dog dare you to
open your eyes ....

Originally posted by links234
Again, you're ignoring the economic crisis. On top of ignorning that you're purposely attributing the 2009 deficit to Obama, when it was Bush who signed the budget for that year.

Again ... look at the links provided. They take 2009/Bush into account.
The fact is ... Obama made it WORSE.

Originally posted by amazing
I so tire of these democrat vs republican threads.

I expose Obama for his exceptionally poor job performance and over spending.
I bash Bush for his over spending and his general goofiness.
I bash Clinton for his corruption, but have stated very clearly that he could balance a budget.
I state very clearly, Reagan did a good job.
My praises and curses fall evenly upon Democrat and Republican alike.

reply to post by xuenchen


Wait, I don't get it. The CBO must be lying, because I distinctly remember Emperor Obama saying he would cut the deficit in half during his first term.

For as many things I despise Obama for, he has done some things that were correct for our capitalist economy... one of those things was keeping this country from absolute collapse when he took office. 2008 wasn't that long ago, I don't know how anyone can forget exactly how dire the financial situation was, how close to the edge we were. Myself, I would have rathered the mortgage bailout go to the homeowners to pay off the mortgages rather than to the mortgage holders to recoup loss, I think we'd be hurting a lot less now if hundreds of thousands of families hadn't been displaced, that would have been a socialist solution though... even though the money would have ended up in the mortgage holders pockets anyway. That one market brought the western world to it's knees.

Nothing with the economy is going to get fixed until we realize we can't keep doing business the way we have been, how long have we been on this boom-bust see-saw anyway? In many ways yes this is GWB's fault, and in many ways it's Bill Clinton's fault and Bush Sr., definitely Reagan has a huge piece of blame pie here too but it goes back even further than him. And it will go on with the next President as well, he or she will reap the rewards of what Obama did right and he or she will be held responsible for a lot of the things he did wrong too.

The deficit is in fact falling year by year but what does that actually mean for the average American? Virtually nothing.

ETA: A lot of people don't understand the difference between deficit and debt. Deficit is what happens when our national budget can't be fully paid for. The national budget for 2013 was 3.7 trillion dollars, we came up 1.1 trillion dollars short of paying those bills. So our 2012 deficit was 1.1 trillion, that 1.1 trillion gets added to the national debt. We are still adding debt but Obama has shrunk the amount of debt we add each year.

reply to post by Kali74

one of those things was keeping this country from absolute collapse when he took office. 2008 wasn't that long ago, I don't know how anyone can forget exactly how dire the financial situation was, how close to the edge we were.

There are still plenty of people that are still in dire financial straits. This is evidenced by the higher numbers of people on food stamps and other government assistance since Obama took office. This doesn't indicate an improvement.

We are close the edge IMO, but we apparently weren't that close in 2008, as we have continually moved closer, yet we haven't crossed the precipice yet.

reply to post by butcherguy


Barring another bubble pop we will keep moving back from the edge, as we have been since the massive 2008 bailout. I'm not a fan of Obama or the bailouts so don't mistake me for being 'blinded by faith'.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by butcherguy

 

Barring another bubble pop we will keep moving back from the edge, as we have been since the massive 2008 bailout. I'm not a fan of Obama or the bailouts so don't mistake me for being 'blinded by faith'.

Oh, I know you are not one of those. You have a brain and use it.
I think we are at a point where the bottom will fall out, it is unavoidable IMO (and it will be global). I think that we haven't really moved back though. Take the artificial Wall Street out of the picture and the economy is worse.

Originally posted by butcherguy

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by butcherguy

 

Barring another bubble pop we will keep moving back from the edge, as we have been since the massive 2008 bailout. I'm not a fan of Obama or the bailouts so don't mistake me for being 'blinded by faith'.

Oh, I know you are not one of those. You have a brain and use it.
I think we are at a point where the bottom will fall out, it is unavoidable IMO (and it will be global). I think that we haven't really moved back though. Take the artificial Wall Street out of the picture and the economy is worse.

Thanks

I think the bottom will eventually fall out too, we can't keep doing this dance forever. We probably have much different solutions but I think we can both agree that we can't keep putting more money into the hands of the banks and financiers that broke our economy in the 1st place... it's unsustainable. If that 2008 bailout had gone into the hands of homeowners, some of them may not have lost their homes, jobs... some families probably wouldn't have fallen apart (financial troubles are the leading cause of divorce/breakups of families) and less people would have fallen into the cracks (ended up on welfare, in family shelters, on food-stamps or off the grid completely). I look at the 2008 bailout like this:

Bank: Uh we made some bad loans and people can't pay us back... help! We'll pay you back!
Government: Ok! We certainly can't have our financial giants collapsing, can we? You'll pay us back right? *wink wink*

Homeowner: Uh, this loan isn't what we agreed on and now we can't pay/we made a bad a choice and are going to end up on the street... help!
Government: Who are you?

Had stipends or grants been given to the people, the mortgage holders would have still gotten their money. Of course the major problem there was the mortgage holders gambled way more than they had owed to them so simply paying off the mortgages many of them still would have gone under.

Anyway that's really beside the point, we shouldn't expect a society that functions this way economically to be any kind of stable.

reply to post by Kali74

I find nothing to disagree with on that entire post.
The bankers are not our friends.
The politicians(on the whole) are not our friends.

We can't expect a solution from either one of them. When everything goes belly-up, the ones at the top (politicians and bankers) will not be hurting, and they will be laughing at everyone as they still live in luxury.

reply to post by poet1b

AS usual, the people who hate Obama get all the facts wrong.

www.bloomberg.com...

The federal budget deficit narrowed from more than 10 percent of the gross domestic product at the end of 2009 to 5.7 percent of GDP for the 12 months ended March 31 -- the smallest gap in four years, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

When are people going to realize that the formulas used to decipher GDP and "market value" don't mean crap in the real world any more?

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa

The deficit is declining, and will be less than half of what it was when Obama took office. Every economic model shows this. Fine if you don't like Obama, but at least admit that you are using lies about his policies because it really is him that you don't like...

That's how Obama misleads people. Obama never says that ANNUAL deficits will decline by half from the time he came INTO OFFICE until the time he LEAVES OFFICE.

Just like Obama telling people in his daily speeches that "Health care costs are growing at the slowest rate in 50 years." and "Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.", and " "Over the past four years, for the first time since the 1990s, the number of manufacturing jobs in America hasn’t gone down, it’s actually gone up.". Once again, I'll point out that RATES don't mean crap when it comes to actual dollars and numbers!!!

reply to post by Cabin

Obama has decreased deficit massively. Deficit does not equal debt.

What's $200 Billion a year in cutting when you're sending out $110 Billion - $125 Billion in error payments alone each year and you're OVER spending still comes to over $1 TRILLION dollars each year? Just imagine the ratio between cutting and spending as it relates to the next ten years. It won't mean squat.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The topic is about Obama saying he was going to cut the deficit

He hasn't that has been proven NUMEROUS TIMES.

Wow...are you lost on the issue..

The Deficit Chart That Should Embarrass Budget Hawks

“Here’s a pretty important fact that virtually everyone in Washington seems oblivious to: The federal deficit has never fallen as fast as it’s falling now without a coincident recession,”

news.investors.com...



Politifact: Obama says deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years: TRUE
www.politifact.com...

Spending?



And here is a painful fact...each years spending and deficit is a result of the prior years budget...so if you nix the HUGE spending the last GOP administration saddled us with for 2009...and only count 2010 forward? The Pres. Obama has reduced spending and the deficit more than any GOP POTUS in the past 80 years at a minimum.

And here...

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported a continued decline in the federal budget deficit: “The CBO projects a $642 billion budget deficit for fiscal year 2013, down more than $200 billion from its February estimate and the smallest annual shortfall since 2008.

www.politicususa.com...


I could do this all day long? Want a dozen more links? It's easy when you are arguing reality vs. BS.

reply to post by Indigo5

Politifact: Obama says deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years: TRUE
www.politifact.com...

FALSE.

The deficit actually fell at a FASTER RATE between 1968 and 1969.

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Politifact: Obama says deficit is falling at the fastest rate in 60 years: TRUE
www.politifact.com...

FALSE.

The deficit actually fell at a FASTER RATE between 1968 and 1969.

Yes...If you choose to look at SINGLE year drops vs.4 Year term changes...then yes between 1968 and 1969 it dropped by a a couple of tenths of point quicker under Dem. President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Whatever get's you through the night

reply to post by Indigo5

And here is a painful fact...each years spending and deficit is a result of the prio years budget...so if you nix the HUGE spending the last GOP administration saddled us with for 2009...and only count 2010 forward? The Pres. Obama has reduced spending and the deficit more than any GOP POTUS...

Do you realize how meaningless the words "reducing spending more" means when you're debt is so much higher to begin with? Of course Obama's "reduced spending" is going to come to a higher DOLLAR amount because his DEBTS are that much HIGHER too.

Let's look at the numbers as they relate to ANNUAL DEFICITS...

2001 = -$128.2 Billion (negative)
2002 = $157.8 Billion
2003 = $377.6 Billion
2004 = $412.7 Billion
2005 = $318.4 Billion
2006 = $248.2 Billion
2007 = $160.7 Billion
2008 = $458.6 Billion
2009 = $1.4 Trillion

2010 = $1.2 Trillion
2011 = $1.2 Trillion
2012 = $1.0 Trillion

So, while Obama may have reduced his ANNUAL deficit by $400 Billion (between 2009 - 2012), Bush was able to reduce his ANNUAL deficit by $252 Billion (between 2004 - 2007). Think about it. What's significant about Obama reducing his ANNUAL deficit by 29% when Bush reduced his by 62% while he was in office?

Notice how Obama doesn't use RATES and PERCENTAGES on these figures, like he does the rest of them? This is the only time he wants to publish REAL numbers, because his will be higher based on the sheer volume of debt that he has in the first place.

Originally posted by Deetermined

So, while Obama may have reduced his ANNUAL deficit by $400 Billion (between 2009 - 2012), Bush was able to reduce his ANNUAL deficit by $252 Billion (between 2004 - 2007). Think about it. What's significant about Obama reducing his ANNUAL deficit by 29% when Bush reduced his by 62% while he was in office?

Strange you mysteriously seem to have forgotten the years 2007-2009?

And the leap in 2009 was based on Pres. Bush's 2008 passed spending bill for 2009.

reply to post by Indigo5


I didn't forget. I posted them for everyone to see. I'm merely pointing out that Obama uses the word "rate" when it's convenient for him and he uses them to MISLEAD people about his accomplishments because a mid-term election is coming. The "proof in the pudding" moment won't come until ACA is completely rolled out and when/if Obama supports another war of some kind. Actually, there's a lot of other things that could happen (like during Bush's term in office) that could derail his whole plan, but we'll just have to wait and see.

In the meanwhile, we continue to see Obama pushing for immigration reform far more than focusing on jobs. Now is not the right time. Plus, we see Obama spouting how manufacturing jobs are going up, and while they have gone up minimally over the last two years, the number of manufacturing jobs that have been lost still outweigh the gain. While manufacturing jobs have increased by 400,000, we're still down by 1,000,000 compared to where we were in 2009 when Obama took office.