BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14 

    By Steve Benen


     


    It was about a year ago when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News and told viewers that Congress should be “focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit.”

    There were a couple of glaring problems with the comment. For one thing, to prioritize the deficit as the “ultimate problem” – as opposed to, say, creating jobs and reducing unemployment – is to have a fairly warped sense of urgent policy needs. For another, the deficit, in reality, is most certainly not “growing.”
    The U.S. government ran a big surplus in April, thanks to a flood of tax payments that helped keep the budget on track for the lowest annual deficit in six years…. Through the first seven months of the 2014 budget year, which began Oct. 1, the deficit totals $306.4 billion. That’s down 37 percent from the same period last year.

    The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting a deficit of $492 billion for the full budget year. That would be the narrowest gap since 2008.
    To be sure, none of this should come as a surprise, at least not to the policy mainstream. In recent years, the federal government has raised taxes and cut spending – and wouldn’t you know it, when Washington takes in more while spending less, the deficit gets smaller.

    This is a basic budgetary truism that Republicans continue to resist. Indeed, last year, when top marginal rates increased on households making more than $400,000 a year, a variety of GOP lawmakers argued that this would likely cause the deficit to go up – as they saw it, higher taxes on the wealthy would slow growth, which would mean fewer jobs, which would mean fewer people paying income taxes, which would mean a larger deficit.

    It appears on this, Republicans had it backwards, which will do nothing to shake the Beltway perception of the GOP as the “fiscally responsible” party.

    Let’s also note that the shrinking deficit – we’re seeing the fastest reduction since the end of World War II – is also one of the nation’s best-kept secrets. It was just last year when an independent national poll asked Americans whether they thought the deficit was increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same. Only 6 percent of the country recognized reality. That’s not a typo; it was just 6 percent.

    The fact remains, however, that the annual budget deficit is on track this year to have shrunk by about $900 billion since President Obama took the oath of office.

    There are still quite a few politicians who claim, just a matter of course, that in the Obama era, the United States runs “a trillion-dollar deficit every year.” It’s well past time for those folks to update their talking points, or at least try to keep up with current events.

    To reiterate a point from last fall, I should note that I don’t consider this sharp reduction in the deficit to be good news. On the contrary, I strongly believe the nation should be borrowing more, not less, taking advantage of low interest rates, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, creating millions of jobs, and leaving deficit reduction for another day.

    That said, if we’re going to have a fiscal debate, it should at least be rooted in reality, not silly misconceptions. And the reality is, we’re witnessing deficit reduction at a truly remarkable clip. Every conservative complaint about fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility in the Obama era is completely divorced from reality.


     


    p.s. There is a great chart that goes with this article that did not print because of the ongoing problems with the site. I suggest those of you who are interested go right to the article where you will be able to see this chart that illustrates the main point of the article so well.


     


     


     


     


     


    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low


     


     


     


                                                                

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    Wait, what?


    http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says" rel="nofollow">http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says


    President Obama's budget adds $6.6 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Thursday.


    That estimate is significantly worse than the $4.9 trillion in deficits predicted by the White House. The CBO used its own less rosy estimates of the economy to complete the analysis.


    The CBO said by 2024, the deficit would be $746 billion, or 2.8 percent of the economy.
    The Office of Management and Budget had said by 2024, the deficit would fall to $434 billion or 1.6 percent of the economy under the budget. In 2013, the deficit was 4.1 percent of the economy.



    Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says#ixzz31aScNeIu
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


    --


    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    That appears to be correct, SB. Look at the chart in the article. The annual budget deficit IS on track for a six-year low.


              ANNUAL BUDGET DEFICIT



    1. 2008   < 500 billion

    2. 2009   1,400 billion

    3. 2010   1,300 billion

    4. 2011   1,300 billion

    5. 2012 <1,100 billion

    6. 2013    <700 billion

    7. 2014      492 billion projected


     


    One difference in the figures is I am talking about are the annual deficits over the last six years. 


    You are talking both about cumulative deficits versus annual deficits as well as projected deficits versus actual deficits....except for the 2014 figure.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    I'd blame it on that party of NO.


    ...the man who really counts in the world is the doer,...  TR 1891

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from UserName9. Show UserName9's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    History shows that conservatives only pretend to care about deficits when Democrats are in office. When Republicans are in office, they are able to provide tax cuts to billionaires and big corporations, launch wars, and increase corporate subsidies (for example, not allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower drug costs or providing unnecessary subsidies for banks to provide student loans) with barely anyone raising concerns about deficits.


    Ironically, its Democrats that are the ones working to reduce the deficits the GOP pretends to care about. Clinton cleaned up the deficits left by Reagan and Bush Sr. And now Obama is doing the same thing with the fiscal imbalance left by W. Bush.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    Cant believe supposed journalists actually use the phrase "cut spending' in regard to the federal governnment...the rate of increase may level off, but the federal Leviathon is endlessly growing and headed for the fiscal cliff...


    Obama has presided over 5 of the 6 largest deficits in US history!!!....Recent deficits only look good compared to the insane spending when the reckless Dems controlled both branches of the Congress...


    Obama's own proposed budgets, thankfully dead on arrival in the sane US House, would have spent even more recklessly...


    What happened in 2007? The financial crisis hadn't struck yet. But we did elect a new Democratic Congress, with Democrats controlling both houses for the first time in over a decade. The trend immediately reversed, and became much worse with President Obama's election in 2008 and inauguration in 2009. (In fact, despite talk of "wars on the credit card," we could save a lot of money by cutting defense spending back to where it was in 2007.)


    So does that mean that the ballooning debt is all Obama's fault? No. Most of those spending bills got Republican votes, too. But it does mean that, as Politico notes, Obama now owns the 60% increase in the debt that has occurred on his watch, and can no longer credibly blame Bush (under whom plenty of Democrats voted for spending bills).


    Economist Herbert Stein observed that something that can't go on forever, won't. The United States can't go on forever increasing its debt by 60% every four years. Therefore, it won't. The only question is how things will stop -- smoothly or catastrophically.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from babytut. Show babytut's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:


    Wait, what?


     


    http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says" rel="nofollow">http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says" rel="nofollow">http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says


     


    President Obama's budget adds $6.6 trillion in deficits over the next 10 years, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) said Thursday.


     


    That estimate is significantly worse than the $4.9 trillion in deficits predicted by the White House. The CBO used its own less rosy estimates of the economy to complete the analysis.


     


    The CBO said by 2024, the deficit would be $746 billion, or 2.8 percent of the economy.
    The Office of Management and Budget had said by 2024, the deficit would fall to $434 billion or 1.6 percent of the economy under the budget. In 2013, the deficit was 4.1 percent of the economy.


     



    Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says#ixzz31aScNeIu" rel="nofollow">http://thehill.com/policy/finance/203756-obama-budget-has-x-deficits-cbo-says#ixzz31aScNeIu
    Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook


     


    --


     


    Think for yourself, question authority.




    cbo is only good when it supports the democrats.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    It is a good thing that it is going down. 


    For libruls to exalt in a smaller deficit is as honest as Republicans claiming they are for cutting spending and a smaller government.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from StalkingButler. Show StalkingButler's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    History shows that conservatives only pretend to care about deficits when Democrats are in office. When Republicans are in office


    You are mistaken UN9, conservatives always care about fiscal responsibility. It's Republicans that only care about them when a Democrat is in office. Despite the fact that there's some overlap they are really two different things.


    --


    Think for yourself, question authority.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from andiejen. Show andiejen's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    Off Topic:

    What is your new avatar, SB?

    Going to take awhile to get used to it. You have had the last one so long, I was beginning to think that is what you looked like. And oddly, I was fine with that. The avatar before that one though, was pretty creepy. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14 

    By Steve Benen

    It was about a year ago when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News and told viewers that Congress should be “focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit.”


    There were a couple of glaring problems with the comment. For one thing, to prioritize the deficit as the “ultimate problem” – as opposed to, say, creating jobs and reducing unemployment – is to have a fairly warped sense of urgent policy needs. For another, the deficit, in reality, is most certainly not “growing.”
    The U.S. government ran a big surplus in April, thanks to a flood of tax payments that helped keep the budget on track for the lowest annual deficit in six years…. Through the first seven months of the 2014 budget year, which began Oct. 1, the deficit totals $306.4 billion. That’s down 37 percent from the same period last year.

    The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting a deficit of $492 billion for the full budget year. That would be the narrowest gap since 2008.
    To be sure, none of this should come as a surprise, at least not to the policy mainstream. In recent years, the federal government has raised taxes and cut spending – and wouldn’t you know it, when Washington takes in more while spending less, the deficit gets smaller.

    This is a basic budgetary truism that Republicans continue to resist. Indeed, last year, when top marginal rates increased on households making more than $400,000 a year, a variety of GOP lawmakers argued that this would likely cause the deficit to go up – as they saw it, higher taxes on the wealthy would slow growth, which would mean fewer jobs, which would mean fewer people paying income taxes, which would mean a larger deficit.

    It appears on this, Republicans had it backwards, which will do nothing to shake the Beltway perception of the GOP as the “fiscally responsible” party.

    Let’s also note that the shrinking deficit – we’re seeing the fastest reduction since the end of World War II – is also one of the nation’s best-kept secrets. It was just last year when an independent national poll asked Americans whether they thought the deficit was increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same. Only 6 percent of the country recognized reality. That’s not a typo; it was just 6 percent.

    The fact remains, however, that the annual budget deficit is on track this year to have shrunk by about $900 billion since President Obama took the oath of office.

    There are still quite a few politicians who claim, just a matter of course, that in the Obama era, the United States runs “a trillion-dollar deficit every year.” It’s well past time for those folks to update their talking points, or at least try to keep up with current events.

    To reiterate a point from last fall, I should note that I don’t consider this sharp reduction in the deficit to be good news. On the contrary, I strongly believe the nation should be borrowing more, not less, taking advantage of low interest rates, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, creating millions of jobs, and leaving deficit reduction for another day.

    That said, if we’re going to have a fiscal debate, it should at least be rooted in reality, not silly misconceptions. And the reality is, we’re witnessing deficit reduction at a truly remarkable clip. Every conservative complaint about fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility in the Obama era is completely divorced from reality.

    p.s. There is a great chart that goes with this article that did not print because of the ongoing problems with the site. I suggest those of you who are interested go right to the article where you will be able to see this chart that illustrates the main point of the article so well.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low                                                        



    Wow. Way to pick a time frame.  Last six years.  Huh.  It is like saying the big ticket item in the Neiman Marcus catalog is the cheapest in six years.  Still comes in at a number twice most people's annual salary, but is is such a bargain.

    What have these deficits done, over the last six years, other than reduce the average salary for the common working man?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14 

    By Steve Benen

    It was about a year ago when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News and told viewers that Congress should be “focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit.”


    There were a couple of glaring problems with the comment. For one thing, to prioritize the deficit as the “ultimate problem” – as opposed to, say, creating jobs and reducing unemployment – is to have a fairly warped sense of urgent policy needs. For another, the deficit, in reality, is most certainly not “growing.”
    The U.S. government ran a big surplus in April, thanks to a flood of tax payments that helped keep the budget on track for the lowest annual deficit in six years…. Through the first seven months of the 2014 budget year, which began Oct. 1, the deficit totals $306.4 billion. That’s down 37 percent from the same period last year.

    The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting a deficit of $492 billion for the full budget year. That would be the narrowest gap since 2008.
    To be sure, none of this should come as a surprise, at least not to the policy mainstream. In recent years, the federal government has raised taxes and cut spending – and wouldn’t you know it, when Washington takes in more while spending less, the deficit gets smaller.

    This is a basic budgetary truism that Republicans continue to resist. Indeed, last year, when top marginal rates increased on households making more than $400,000 a year, a variety of GOP lawmakers argued that this would likely cause the deficit to go up – as they saw it, higher taxes on the wealthy would slow growth, which would mean fewer jobs, which would mean fewer people paying income taxes, which would mean a larger deficit.

    It appears on this, Republicans had it backwards, which will do nothing to shake the Beltway perception of the GOP as the “fiscally responsible” party.

    Let’s also note that the shrinking deficit – we’re seeing the fastest reduction since the end of World War II – is also one of the nation’s best-kept secrets. It was just last year when an independent national poll asked Americans whether they thought the deficit was increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same. Only 6 percent of the country recognized reality. That’s not a typo; it was just 6 percent.

    The fact remains, however, that the annual budget deficit is on track this year to have shrunk by about $900 billion since President Obama took the oath of office.

    There are still quite a few politicians who claim, just a matter of course, that in the Obama era, the United States runs “a trillion-dollar deficit every year.” It’s well past time for those folks to update their talking points, or at least try to keep up with current events.

    To reiterate a point from last fall, I should note that I don’t consider this sharp reduction in the deficit to be good news. On the contrary, I strongly believe the nation should be borrowing more, not less, taking advantage of low interest rates, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, creating millions of jobs, and leaving deficit reduction for another day.

    That said, if we’re going to have a fiscal debate, it should at least be rooted in reality, not silly misconceptions. And the reality is, we’re witnessing deficit reduction at a truly remarkable clip. Every conservative complaint about fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility in the Obama era is completely divorced from reality.

    p.s. There is a great chart that goes with this article that did not print because of the ongoing problems with the site. I suggest those of you who are interested go right to the article where you will be able to see this chart that illustrates the main point of the article so well.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low                                                        



    Wow. Way to pick a time frame.  Last six years.  Huh.  It is like saying the big ticket item in the Neiman Marcus catalog is the cheapest in six years.  Still comes in at a number twice most people's annual salary, but is is such a bargain.

    What have these deficits done, over the last six years, other than reduce the average salary for the common working man?



    The cut in the deficit is a result of a cut in spending and a Tax increase.  Are you suggesting that Taxes be increased even more?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14 

    By Steve Benen

    It was about a year ago when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News and told viewers that Congress should be “focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit.”


    There were a couple of glaring problems with the comment. For one thing, to prioritize the deficit as the “ultimate problem” – as opposed to, say, creating jobs and reducing unemployment – is to have a fairly warped sense of urgent policy needs. For another, the deficit, in reality, is most certainly not “growing.”
    The U.S. government ran a big surplus in April, thanks to a flood of tax payments that helped keep the budget on track for the lowest annual deficit in six years…. Through the first seven months of the 2014 budget year, which began Oct. 1, the deficit totals $306.4 billion. That’s down 37 percent from the same period last year.

    The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting a deficit of $492 billion for the full budget year. That would be the narrowest gap since 2008.
    To be sure, none of this should come as a surprise, at least not to the policy mainstream. In recent years, the federal government has raised taxes and cut spending – and wouldn’t you know it, when Washington takes in more while spending less, the deficit gets smaller.

    This is a basic budgetary truism that Republicans continue to resist. Indeed, last year, when top marginal rates increased on households making more than $400,000 a year, a variety of GOP lawmakers argued that this would likely cause the deficit to go up – as they saw it, higher taxes on the wealthy would slow growth, which would mean fewer jobs, which would mean fewer people paying income taxes, which would mean a larger deficit.

    It appears on this, Republicans had it backwards, which will do nothing to shake the Beltway perception of the GOP as the “fiscally responsible” party.

    Let’s also note that the shrinking deficit – we’re seeing the fastest reduction since the end of World War II – is also one of the nation’s best-kept secrets. It was just last year when an independent national poll asked Americans whether they thought the deficit was increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same. Only 6 percent of the country recognized reality. That’s not a typo; it was just 6 percent.

    The fact remains, however, that the annual budget deficit is on track this year to have shrunk by about $900 billion since President Obama took the oath of office.

    There are still quite a few politicians who claim, just a matter of course, that in the Obama era, the United States runs “a trillion-dollar deficit every year.” It’s well past time for those folks to update their talking points, or at least try to keep up with current events.

    To reiterate a point from last fall, I should note that I don’t consider this sharp reduction in the deficit to be good news. On the contrary, I strongly believe the nation should be borrowing more, not less, taking advantage of low interest rates, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, creating millions of jobs, and leaving deficit reduction for another day.

    That said, if we’re going to have a fiscal debate, it should at least be rooted in reality, not silly misconceptions. And the reality is, we’re witnessing deficit reduction at a truly remarkable clip. Every conservative complaint about fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility in the Obama era is completely divorced from reality.

    p.s. There is a great chart that goes with this article that did not print because of the ongoing problems with the site. I suggest those of you who are interested go right to the article where you will be able to see this chart that illustrates the main point of the article so well.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low                                                        



    Wow. Way to pick a time frame.  Last six years.  Huh.  It is like saying the big ticket item in the Neiman Marcus catalog is the cheapest in six years.  Still comes in at a number twice most people's annual salary, but is is such a bargain.

    What have these deficits done, over the last six years, other than reduce the average salary for the common working man?



    The cut in the deficit is a result of a cut in spending and a Tax increase.  Are you suggesting that Taxes be increased even more?




    Stop with the Government-speak.

    There are no "cuts"  in spending, only tiny limits in the endless increases...

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14 

    By Steve Benen

    It was about a year ago when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News and told viewers that Congress should be “focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit.”


    There were a couple of glaring problems with the comment. For one thing, to prioritize the deficit as the “ultimate problem” – as opposed to, say, creating jobs and reducing unemployment – is to have a fairly warped sense of urgent policy needs. For another, the deficit, in reality, is most certainly not “growing.”
    The U.S. government ran a big surplus in April, thanks to a flood of tax payments that helped keep the budget on track for the lowest annual deficit in six years…. Through the first seven months of the 2014 budget year, which began Oct. 1, the deficit totals $306.4 billion. That’s down 37 percent from the same period last year.

    The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting a deficit of $492 billion for the full budget year. That would be the narrowest gap since 2008.
    To be sure, none of this should come as a surprise, at least not to the policy mainstream. In recent years, the federal government has raised taxes and cut spending – and wouldn’t you know it, when Washington takes in more while spending less, the deficit gets smaller.

    This is a basic budgetary truism that Republicans continue to resist. Indeed, last year, when top marginal rates increased on households making more than $400,000 a year, a variety of GOP lawmakers argued that this would likely cause the deficit to go up – as they saw it, higher taxes on the wealthy would slow growth, which would mean fewer jobs, which would mean fewer people paying income taxes, which would mean a larger deficit.

    It appears on this, Republicans had it backwards, which will do nothing to shake the Beltway perception of the GOP as the “fiscally responsible” party.

    Let’s also note that the shrinking deficit – we’re seeing the fastest reduction since the end of World War II – is also one of the nation’s best-kept secrets. It was just last year when an independent national poll asked Americans whether they thought the deficit was increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same. Only 6 percent of the country recognized reality. That’s not a typo; it was just 6 percent.

    The fact remains, however, that the annual budget deficit is on track this year to have shrunk by about $900 billion since President Obama took the oath of office.

    There are still quite a few politicians who claim, just a matter of course, that in the Obama era, the United States runs “a trillion-dollar deficit every year.” It’s well past time for those folks to update their talking points, or at least try to keep up with current events.

    To reiterate a point from last fall, I should note that I don’t consider this sharp reduction in the deficit to be good news. On the contrary, I strongly believe the nation should be borrowing more, not less, taking advantage of low interest rates, investing heavily in infrastructure and economic development, creating millions of jobs, and leaving deficit reduction for another day.

    That said, if we’re going to have a fiscal debate, it should at least be rooted in reality, not silly misconceptions. And the reality is, we’re witnessing deficit reduction at a truly remarkable clip. Every conservative complaint about fiscal recklessness and irresponsibility in the Obama era is completely divorced from reality.

    p.s. There is a great chart that goes with this article that did not print because of the ongoing problems with the site. I suggest those of you who are interested go right to the article where you will be able to see this chart that illustrates the main point of the article so well.

    http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low" rel="nofollow">http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/budget-deficit-track-six-year-low                                                        



    Wow. Way to pick a time frame.  Last six years.  Huh.  It is like saying the big ticket item in the Neiman Marcus catalog is the cheapest in six years.  Still comes in at a number twice most people's annual salary, but is is such a bargain.

    What have these deficits done, over the last six years, other than reduce the average salary for the common working man?



    The cut in the deficit is a result of a cut in spending and a Tax increase.  Are you suggesting that Taxes be increased even more?



    Ah, no, I'm not.  Unlike you, I understand the Laffer curve.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    In response to ronreganfan's comment:

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX-YEAR LOW

    05/12/14                                                          



    Wow. Way to pick a time frame.  Last six years.  Huh.  It is like saying the big ticket item in the Neiman Marcus catalog is the cheapest in six years.  Still comes in at a number twice most people's annual salary, but is is such a bargain.

    What have these deficits done, over the last six years, other than reduce the average salary for the common working man?



    The cut in the deficit is a result of a cut in spending and a Tax increase.  Are you suggesting that Taxes be increased even more?




    Stop with the Government-speak.

    There are no "cuts"  in spending, only tiny limits in the endless increases...



    Come on know.  There was one person who lost their job as a result of the sequester cuts.  That's got to count as a cut in spending.

    As to the truth, you got it right.  The only cuts are in the rate of spending increases.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to andiejen's comment:

    Off Topic:

    What is your new avatar, SB?

    Going to take awhile to get used to it. You have had the last one so long, I was beginning to think that is what you looked like. And oddly, I was fine with that. The avatar before that one though, was pretty creepy. 




    [object HTMLDivElement]

    It is cool, looks like a stalking robot

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    "The shrinking deficit is one of the nation's best kept secrets..."


    It is not only a secret, a "shrinking deficit" is a flatly false statement....


    The deficit isnt shrinking...it may be relatively smaller for the past few individual years, but still it is cumulatively gaining...


    Say you gain 50 pounds in one year, you are at 250 pounds... and your doctor says you are at risk....so the next year you gain 30 pounds....and the next year you gain 25 pounds....and the next year, 20 pounds...


    Your weight increases are on track for a three year low! You must feel great, such a great job of weight control....right?


    Obama has presided over fiscal gluttony on a massive scale... 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ronreganfan. Show ronreganfan's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    "The shrinking deficit is one of the nation's best kept secrets..."

     

    It is not only a secret, a "shrinking deficit" is a flatly false statement....

     

    The deficit isnt shrinking...it may be relatively smaller for the past few individual years, but still it is cumulatively gaining...

     

    Say you gain 50 pounds in one year, you are at 250 pounds... and your doctor says you are at risk....so the next year you gain 30 pounds....and the next year you gain 25 pounds....and the next year, 20 pounds...

     

    Your weight increases are on track for a three year low! You must feel great, such a great job of weight control....right?

     

    Obama has presided over fiscal gluttony on a massive scale... 



    We should be happy that the fat man has cut back from two quarts an ice cream per night to one, but let's not sign him up for a spot in Chippendale's. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    Lol the deficit is primarily caused by the tax cuts.  Get rid of the special tax rate for qualified dividends and the deficit will be greatly reduced.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:

    Lol the deficit is primarily caused by the tax cuts.  Get rid of the special tax rate for qualified dividends and the deficit will be greatly reduced.



    Complete and utter nonsense. I defy you to show how a tax cut results in a deficit. Impossible. A deficit is a result of spending when you do not have the money. 

    They can cut taxes as you say - which is a misnomer because you do not cut taxes you cut tax rates - and lets say that results in less revenue than they were expecting. The Congress has the power to cut spending to match revenues, they just choose never to do so. Congress does not exercise its power and the executive writes the checks that cause the deficit.

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hansoribrother. Show Hansoribrother's posts

    Re: BUDGET DEFICIT ON TRACK FOR SIX YEAR LOW

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

    "The shrinking deficit is one of the nation's best kept secrets..."

     

    It is not only a secret, a "shrinking deficit" is a flatly false statement....

     

    The deficit isnt shrinking...it may be relatively smaller for the past few individual years, but still it is cumulatively gaining...

     

    Say you gain 50 pounds in one year, you are at 250 pounds... and your doctor says you are at risk....so the next year you gain 30 pounds....and the next year you gain 25 pounds....and the next year, 20 pounds...

     

    Your weight increases are on track for a three year low! You must feel great, such a great job of weight control....right?

     

    Obama has presided over fiscal gluttony on a massive scale... 



    You are mixing up the deficit and the debt. The national debt is growing but the annual deficit in spending is shrinking.

    The cocktail being mixed by the Fed printing money and the national debt will turn into a disaster when interest rates increase. That is going to happen, it is only a question of when.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share