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

reply to post by Deetermined


I will have to step in and give one to Obama job plan he indeed try to put forward a infrastructure plan to create jobs but congress has voted the plan down two times already once when Obama was in first term and the second just recently.

So I wonder why help creating jobs in America is such a hard thing for congress to approve, but they had no problem approving 5 billions right away to fund terrorist in Egypt.

I swear to god anytime I see infrastructure mentioned it just infuriates me.

Infrastructure are local and state issues.

They get paid for via property taxes,lotteries,toll road taxs etc.

Then most of them will be built by Chinese Companies not even American.

And that COSTS MONEY we don't have which ADDS to the deficits.

reply to post by neo96


Don't be so hasty, I never read the original plan but if I am not mistaken it was to create jobs for America people (more illegal immigrants than Americans) but never less it was for Obama big job creating scheme.

So be nice Neo.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by neo96

 

Don't be so hasty, I never read the original plan but if I am not mistaken it was to create jobs for America people (more illegal immigrants than Americans) but never less it was for Obama big job creating scheme.

So be nice Neo.

Niether did Obama that's me being nice

I'd like to just drop a couple of little bits of information. Reasoned argument doesn't seem to be going over so well.

First, the 2009 budget. Some posters seem to insist on calling it a Bush budget. I can't figure out why. It was proposed and passed by a Democrat House and Senate and signed on March 11 by President Obama. It could possibly have been any more Obama's budget. Please stop saying it was Bush's, that's just not true.

Second, while running for the Presidency in 2008, Candidate Obama said the following:

The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.

hotair.com...
Obama condemns himself from his own mouth.

reply to post by charles1952


Very Good Charles !!



And for the record, Obama (as a U.S. Senator) voted Yes to the T.A.R.P. bill too !!

Here is how the Obama budget expectations has gone so far.

February 23, 2009 President Obama made the bold statement that he and his administration would work to cut the federal deficit in half.

This was Obama statement on the state of the UNION.

obamalies.net...

Fact, Until 2012,

Now we have 5 trillion more dollars in debt then we did in the beginning of 2009. In past times the bulk of Americans would rise up and demand a stop to the madness, but today this is considered to be just another necessary thing to help the “recovering” economy

Because is no only Bush fault but also the economy.

In 2012 Obama released his newest budget that include cuts to many social programs, like unemployment benefits, thousands unemployed within the government and forlongs to those that still hold a job.

Budget Claim: $850 billion in savings from ending wars. $230 billion of those savings will be used on highways.

Fact: There is no direct peace savings. The money that was used on the wars was borrowed money. If they are to spend it on something else (assuming they can end the wars) they would have to continue to borrow money.

Budget Claim: Taxes on the rich will be increased, breaks for the oil and gas industry’s will end, some spending programs the president is willing to sacrifice, will be cut.

Fact: There has been no tax increases passed, and any effort to do so will be inevitably blocked by republicans. As it stands right now, the “tax the rich” narrative is nothing more then a campaign promise if he gets re-elected.

Budget Claim: The U.S. will see good GDP growth. The Budget predicts that it will reach 4 percent in 2014 and 4.2 in 2015.

Fact: Basing a budget on speculative growth is irresponsible. Looking back, the White House GDP projection for 2011 was 2.7 percent. It was actually 1.7 falling a percentage point. For 2012, the White House at first projected 3.6 percent growth, but has since been lowered to 3 percent. Several reputable firms such as IHS Global Insight have their projections around the 2 – 2.1 percent range. Their record of past projections have been much stronger then the White House’s speculation.

obamalies.net...

Obama Proposed budget for 2014

President Obama on Wednesday proposed a $3.77 trillion budget for 2014 that would cut deficits by $1.8 trillion over the next decade.

He will try to introduce again his infrastructure job creation bill again

Boost infrastructure spending: The president's budget calls for a $50 billion investment to, among other things, repair highways, bridges, transit systems and airports. He would also create a National Infrastructure Bank to bring together public and private capital for important projects.

His budget cuts will screw more the working class retirement accounts, Medicare for the elderly and increase taxes for 81% of most households.

But this is all projections that will extend to 2020 as usual nothing but projections that will fall into the hands of the next president and many will never ever happen.

Reduce deficits by $1.8 trillion: Obama's debt reduction proposal comes straight from an offer he made to House Speaker John Boehner last year during their fiscal cliff negotiations.

The proposal would replace the automatic budget cuts that went into effect last month.

Close to $600 billion of the $1.8 trillion would come from new revenue -- specifically the cap on itemized deductions and the Buffett Rule.

The other $1.2 trillion would come from spending cuts: $200 billion from defense and nondefense programs on the discretionary side of the budget. Another $400 billion from Medicare and other federal health programs in ways that largely affect hospitals and drug companies. And $600 billion in cuts affecting non-health spending on things like agricultural subsidies and unemployment insurance.

money.cnn.com...

Now within all this "Proposals" we most remember that Obamacrap will be hitting the economy and as today we don't know the total cost of it.

Originally posted 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.

Oh, and the 2009 budget was the last budget of the GW admin, not the Obama admin.

While the GW admin increased the deficit with every budget they introduced, the Obama admin has shrunk deficit spending.

Thank you for not being a partisan hack looking to slam either Bush or Obama. Your numbers are slightly off though. The 2010 budget was actually the last of W's. The second year budget is mostly made up of the previous administration though the current administration has a little bit of control over it. This puts Obama's budgets as 2011-18 W's as 2003-2010 and so on.

reply to post by Aazadan

I may have been misinformed all this time, if I have been, I'd appreciate a correction. I do know that the budget passed in 2008 was passed by a Democrat House and Senate. It was signed in March of 2009 by Obama.

Would you be so kind as to provide a link to a source showing that not only was that a Bush budget, but the one after that was, too? Please, not just your statement to that effect, there is a slight possibility that you may be wrong.

reply to post by charles1952


Your not wrong the house writes the budget, and the Democrats controlled the house, and the senate they sure like to blame the last guy, but they can't.

That is on their heads.

reply to post by charles1952


Again

Now we know WHO REALLY owns that first $Trillion deficit don't we.
(along with all that followed)

[Obama sneaks quietly out a side door]

Originally posted by marg6043
Don't be so hasty, I never read the original plan but if I am not mistaken it was to create jobs for America people (more illegal immigrants than Americans) but never less it was for Obama big job creating scheme.

I dont buy anything this guy sells.


If it was anything like Solyndra, Beacon Power Corp, etc ....Then you know what you were going to get when Obama had his hands on it.

Lets face it. Hes done nothing for this Country except Polirize it.

reply to post by aoxomoxoa


Im sorry but if you go to the current national defecit in real time, the debt AND defecit and rising continuously, they are not falling, I don't know where you heard that.Here is the link ,,please look at it www.usdebtclock.org...

reply to post by charles1952


The 2009 budget was created during GWs last year in office, negotiated long before Obama was ever elected, and a continuation of the idiotic free market policies that destroyed the US economy, and the mess that came afterwards.

That repubs continue to blame Obama for the mess created by GW and the republicans demonstrates that they have no sense of responsibility, no integrity, no willingness to admit that the policies that they support are destroying the U.S..

reply to post by poet1b


If my math doesn't fail me, the last 5 trillion added to the deficit is been since Obama took office and how long has Obama been in office? yes, almost 5 years, that is one trillion a year.

Unless Bush is still managing the white house from behind the scene then we can keep blaming him.

Every president have the power to push for reform, the problems is that our state of the economy can not be fixed no matter what the Politicians claims, campaign and promise.

that is the way things are, the deficit will no go down no matter what because to run the over inflated government we have it cost money.

One obvious question is why did the deficit rise so quickly from 2008 to 2009 ?

2008 deficit was $459 billion with revenues of $2.5 trillion.

2009 deficit was $1.4 trillion with revenues of $2.1 trillion.

Pretty big gap there I would say.

What did the Democrat controlled Congress put in the budget that added to THAT much of a difference ?

Bush did not sign that budget, Obama did in March 2009.

Hmmm.

Originally posted by xuenchen
One obvious question is why did the deficit rise so quickly from 2008 to 2009 ?

2008 deficit was $459 billion with revenues of $2.5 trillion.

2009 deficit was $1.4 trillion with revenues of $2.1 trillion.

Pretty big gap there I would say.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

Enacted on October 3, 2008. Reflected in 2009 budget.

Not the only reason, obviously, but a major one.

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by xuenchen
One obvious question is why did the deficit rise so quickly from 2008 to 2009 ?

2008 deficit was $459 billion with revenues of $2.5 trillion.

2009 deficit was $1.4 trillion with revenues of $2.1 trillion.

Pretty big gap there I would say.

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

Enacted on October 3, 2008. Reflected in 2009 budget.

Not the only reason, obviously, but a major one.

That's a good step 1.

I wonder what THAT cost ?

reply to post by poet1b

Dear poet1b,

Rather than be wordy, as I usually am, please excuse my bluntness.

The 2009 budget was created during GWs last year in office, negotiated long before Obama was ever elected,

Ridiculous, that was a Democrat budget, forced down the throat of Republicans. "Negotiations?" Ha!. Not a single Republican voted for it in the House and only two Republican Senators could swallow it.
www.opencongress.org...

Notice that it was passed in June, and the President signed it eight months later? That was because Bush had promised to veto it.
President Bush Friday sought to renew his fight with the Democratic-controlled Congress over discretionary spending, telling an audience of conservative supporters he will veto appropriations bills if they exceed his $987.6 billion fiscal 2009 spending limit.

"For five years in a row, my budget requests have kept the growth of non-security discretionary spending below the rate of inflation. I set clear spending limits, told the Congress I was going to ... veto bills if they exceeded those spending limits. The Democratically controlled Congress, at the end of last year, cut spending plans by billions of dollars," Bush told the Conservative Political Action Conference. "And if Congress sends me appropriations bills that exceed the reasonable limits I have set, I will veto the bills."
www.govexec.com...

As far as the rest of the comments, that the free market destroyed the economy (when it was the free market that created it), that this failed recovery is Bush's fault (even though the recession was not as sharp as the one in the 80's, and Reagan was about 8 times more succesful in fixing the one he had than Obama has been), and the idea that this can be said with a straight face

republicans demonstrates that they have no sense of responsibility, no integrity, no willingness to admit that the policies that they support are destroying the U.S..

in the face of Obama's unwillingness to accept responsibility for anything, and his willingness to lie, while his destructive policies are being implemented, leads me to conclude that you are arguing from your heart instead of your brain.

If you have any evidence, I'd be glad to hear it, but as yet I've seen none which relieves Obama of this responsibility.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by charles1952


What is ridiculous is your reply.

While Republicans tried to pretend they weren't for the bailout, they certainly voted for the bailout, and completely supported the bailout.

In fact the republicans wanted to give hundreds of billions to the banks without any strings attached. The Obama admin insisted on the checks, including denying CEO bonuses, which got the U.S. gov paid back a lot of money much more quickly.

I don't know what fantasy world you are writing about, but GW was completely behind the bailouts and the biggest deficit ever created, that was created by the GW admin..

The world is laughing at the US for ever electing GW, and those who pretend the economic collapse was not the direct fault of free market policies which allowed banks to get by with massive fraud.

It is like the birther movement, just complete fantasy nonsense.