The Federal Deficit is Doing Pretty Good

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
74,944
65,080
So. Md.
#1
This is for those who obsess about it. You guys will note that the deficit has been reduced considerably since 2009 and it hasn't helped the economy. As a matter of fact, if we had put more money into the economy it would probably be a lot better off than it is today. But some of you need to stop suggesting that Obama is the biggest spender evah. Because it simply isn't true.



Now, CBO's forecast doesn't take into account future booms or busts in the economy, since they can't predict those. And as the chart makes crystal clear, that'swhat causes big changes in the deficit. It's the economy, stupid, not runaway spending. When times are good, the deficit shrinks. When times are bad, it gets worse. If you really want to avoid big deficits in the future, stop obsessing about cutting spending on the poor, and instead spend some time obsessing about economic policies that will help grow the economy.
My bolding above is for those who blame the poor, the elderly and the disabled, or our elected officials who try to take care of them, for our economic woes.

Chart of the Day: The Federal Deficit Is In Pretty Good Shape These Days | Mother Jones
 
Likes: 2 people

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
94,227
31,923
Pittsburgh, PA
#2
You guys will note that the deficit has been reduced considerably since 2009 and it hasn't helped the economy.
Other way around. All that deficit spending didn't do anything for the economy. Would you rather have the economy of 2009 or today?
 

Jets

Former Staff
Feb 2011
22,243
11,921
New York
#3
Which begs this question: Would the deficit been even lower if the money was not spent on the stimulus?
 

Blueneck

Former Staff
Jun 2007
53,970
40,500
Ohio
#5
Of course it would. People are always better off when they don't buy snake oil.
By far the largest expenditure in the Stimulus was tax cuts. 116 billion, at the top of the list and as you scroll down there's a whole lot more of them.

Here's the list:

The Stimulus Plan: How to Spend $787 Billion - The New York Times

There's a drop down menu (where it says "Filter by") so you can sort them by category, like "tax cuts" or "aid to states".

Hard to say if we would be better off now had this not been passed. I'm sure it could have been a lot smaller, though.
 
Likes: 1 person
Jul 2011
34,665
2,774
Tennessee
#7
This is for those who obsess about it. You guys will note that the deficit has been reduced considerably since 2009 and it hasn't helped the economy. As a matter of fact, if we had put more money into the economy it would probably be a lot better off than it is today. But some of you need to stop suggesting that Obama is the biggest spender evah. Because it simply isn't true.





My bolding above is for those who blame the poor, the elderly and the disabled, or our elected officials who try to take care of them, for our economic woes.

Chart of the Day: The Federal Deficit Is In Pretty Good Shape These Days | Mother Jones
a 1/2 trillion dollar deficit is bad!!

you always see the left spin the deficit as a percentage of GDP when its the actual dollar amount that matters.
 
Last edited:
Likes: 1 person

Babba

Former Staff
Jul 2007
74,944
65,080
So. Md.
#8
a 1/2 trillion dollar deficit is bad!!

you always see the left spin the deficit as a percentage of GDP when its the actual dollar amount that matters.
1/2 $trillion would be bad for a much smaller economy, but for an economy the size we have, it's manageable. So you see, that number alone doesn't actually tell you much.
 
Likes: 1 person

Blueneck

Former Staff
Jun 2007
53,970
40,500
Ohio
#9
a 1/2 trillion dollar deficit is bad!!

you always see the left spin the deficit as a percentage of GDP when its the actual dollar amount that matters.
Actually, that's the first time I've ever heard "the left" using that particular math to justify the deficit. Until today, I've always heard "the right" use that to justify Bush's spending, which if you look at from the perspective of where we started and where we ended, was much worse.

And please keep in mind that Obama has put both wars in regular budget so technically he gets blamed for spending he had nothing to do with initiating.

As long as the totals are trending down and the economy is going up, I'm happy and I actually prefer it to happen slowly. I like predictability and stability when it comes to money. I think it's healthier all the way around.
 
Likes: 3 people

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
94,227
31,923
Pittsburgh, PA
#10
Actually, that's the first time I've ever heard "the left" using that particular math to justify the deficit. Until today, I've always heard "the right" use that to justify Bush's spending, which if you look at from the perspective of where we started and where we ended, was much worse.

And please keep in mind that Obama has put both wars in regular budget so technically he gets blamed for spending he had nothing to do with initiating.

As long as the totals are trending down and the economy is going up, I'm happy and I actually prefer it to happen slowly. I like predictability and stability when it comes to money. I think it's healthier all the way around.
The wars always were on budget. Emergency supplemental is just away around spending caps. It doesn't hide it from the budget.
 
Likes: 1 person