Deficit Drops to 296 Billion!

[recxjake]

Pro Growth Tax Cuts are working!!!

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush Tuesday touted new deficit figures showing considerable improvement upon earlier administration predictions, trumpeting the news as a validation of President Bush's pro-growth tax cuts.

The deficit will for budget year ending September 30 will register $296 billion under a new White House estimate released Tuesday. That's much better than the $423 billion that Bush predicted in February and a slight improvement over 2005.

A surge in taxes paid by corporations and the wealthy is largely responsible for the deficit drop.

Bush trumpeted the good news as a validation of his pro-growth tax cuts and his clampdown on domestic agencies funded by Congress.

However, the results are less impressive when compared to the $318 billion deficit posted last fall for fiscal 2005. Despite strong revenues, the high costs of the Iraq war and Gulf Coast hurricane relief have weighed on the deficit -- as have higher interest payments paid on the national debt.

According to Congressional Budget Office figures released Friday, revenues are running $206 billion greater than those realized over a comparable period last year.

The nonpartisan CBO, which makes estimates for lawmakers, also said that the deficit for the first three quarters of fiscal 2006 came in $41 billion less than the red ink recorded for the same period in 2005. The budget year ends September 30.

Those CBO figures say receipts are surging at an 13 percent growth rate, reflecting particularly strong growth in taxes paid on corporate profits and income taxes paid by wealthier people and small businessmen who pay taxes quarterly instead of having them withheld by employers. Those tax collections are more prone to fluctuate, budget experts say.

Income and payroll taxes paid by individuals, which tend to be more stable, are growing at a slower 8 percent rate, CBO says.

"We've had extraordinarily good profit growth, and when you have better profit growth than wage growth you tend to have windfall tax revenues because taxes on profits are higher than taxes on wages," said Diane Swonk, chief economist for Mesirow Financial, a Chicago-based financial services firm.

Swonk predicted that the unexpected revenue surge would ease around the end of the year as profits peak.

Bush has had few opportunities to boast about the deficit over the course of his time in office. He inherited in 2001 a surplus estimated by both White House and congressional forecasters at $5.6 trillion over the subsequent decade, and it quickly dwindled.

Those faulty estimates assumed the late-1990s revenue boom -- fueled by the stock market and dot.com booms -- would continue. But that bubble burst, and a recession and the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks started a flow of red ink. Several rounds of tax cuts, including Bush's signature $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, also contributed to the return to deficits four years ago after four years of budget surpluses.

Even before the release of the figures, critics poked at the White House figures, citing, for example how they are at odds from Bush's original budget released in 2001, which predicted a $305 billion surplus for the current year, even after accounting for tax cuts.

"The deficit's probably going to be in the range of $300 billion and that still represents a swing of about $600 billion from what was projected in 2001," said Rep. John Spratt Jr. of South Carolina, top Democrat on the Budget Committee. "You've still got triple-digit deficits for as far as the eye can see."

Some budget experts say the steep rise in tax receipts looks more impressive than it really is since revenues are bouncing back from a three-year decline during Bush's first term, drops not seen since the Great Depression.

"The current so-called revenue surge is merely restoring revenues to where they were half a decade ago," said Robert Greenstein, executive director of the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities think tank. That's after accounting for inflation and population growth.

Still, the new figures should allow Bush to claim credibly that he will meet his promise, made in early 2004, that he will cut the deficit in half by the end of his second term. Then, the White House forecast the deficit to be $521 billion for the 2004 budget year, setting the goal of $260 billion by 2009.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

[jiveturkey]

I can dig that.

[Radar Chief]

I can dig that.

Just as long as it doesn’t mean teh Debil will look to find a way of spend’n this new windfall.

[Simplex3]

It doesn't matter how much money we give the ruling class in Washington, they'll always find a way to spend more than we give them in their desperate effort to buy more votes and remain in power.

[dirk digler]

It doesn't matter how much money we give the ruling class in Washington, they'll always find a way to spend more than we give them in their desperate effort to buy more votes and remain in power.

Damn your such a downer... :p

[Cochise]

That's really cool. Finally some progress on it.

[recxjake]

If you take Iraq/Afghanistan + Katrina out of the mix... it would be in the 100 billion range

[Simplex3]

If you take Iraq/Afghanistan + Katrina out of the mix... it would be in the 100 billion range
Hell yeah! And we can take out the entire 9/11 attack and all the money we gave to the victims! Then we could just take out the military!

Or we could start on things like this:

http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006
The 2006 Congressional Pig Book is the latest installment of Citizens Against Government Waste’s (CAGW) 16-year exposé of pork-barrel spending. This year’s list includes: $13,500,000 for the International Fund for Ireland, which helped finance the World Toilet Summit; $6,435,000 for wood utilization research; $1,000,000 for the Waterfree Urinal Conservation Initiative; and $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C.

[Iowanian]

Thats great news.

While the Conflicts overseas and Natural disasters have had some negative effects on parts of the economy, I'll also counter by suggesting that they have also stimulated alot of business and had positive economic impact in Defense and construction/cleanup related industry and manufacturing.

Gas however, just went over the $3 mark in my location yesterday.

[DaFace]

Perhaps this is already obvious to everyone, but just to make sure. Keep in mind that this is just a reduction in a yearly budget deficit. We're still $8.4 trillion (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm) in the red and getting worse by the day. I suppose slowing the decline is a good thing, but it's not like this is a turning point or anything.

[recxjake]

In about two weeks the Oil industry will report their Q2 profits.... probably gonna be a record again..... As much as I'm against windfall taxes... they need to do somthing to battle these gas prices

[recxjake]

Perhaps this is already obvious to everyone, but just to make sure. Keep in mind that this is just a reduction in a yearly budget deficit. We're still $8.4 trillion (http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdpenny.htm) in the red and getting worse by the day. I suppose slowing the decline is a good thing, but it's not like this is a turning point or anything.

The amount the United States borrows compared to the GDP is around 3%.... not bad at all.... compare that your home loan!

[htismaqe]

It doesn't matter how much money we give the ruling class in Washington, they'll always find a way to spend more than we give them in their desperate effort to buy more votes and remain in power.

Yep.

[DaFace]

The amount the United States borrows compared to the GDP is around 3%.... not bad at all.... compare that your home loan!

Our current GDP is somewhere around $13 trillion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)). You're right that we only borrow around 3% yearly, but when you buy a new house every year and don't make payments on the old ones, it adds up pretty quick. Our current debt/income ratio as a country is around 65%.

[DanT]

Wikipedia.org has a good entry on the "Broken Window Fallacy", the faulty notion that earmarking money to destroy lives and property or to repair said destruction is good for the overall economy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_window_fallacy

It is true that segments of the economy may benefit, but that doesn't make it a good thing overall.

With regard to the astonishing $200+ billion deficit, it's amazing how so much could be spent on so little. We should be in a surplus situation. Pissing away money on illegal and immoral wars isn't smart, especially if you're unashamed enough to commit such an atrocity but too ashamed to take the oil that you would be rightfully entitled to if the war were justified.

[Simplex3]

In about two weeks the Oil industry will report their Q2 profits.... probably gonna be a record again..... As much as I'm against windfall taxes... they need to do somthing to battle these gas prices
"Windfall" taxes are one of the dumbest things anyone ever came up with. Who the f**k are you to decide how much someone can or can't make? If you're so convinced that oil companies are screwing you then buy stock and take part in it jacka**.

[Logical]

ROFL Like 296 billion is good. Are you really such a stooge for the Neocons?

[the Talking Can]

holy shit...I just realized that recxjake is serious...I thought thread was joke...

whoa.....i need to lay down for a sec...

[Iowanian]

You're right dant....the US should pillage and Burn.

[recxjake]

ROFL Like 296 billion is good. Are you really such a stooge for the Neocons?

Going from 432 Billion to 296 Billion in predicted deficits in one year is great... The Bush tax cuts are working!

[recxjake]

"Windfall" taxes are one of the dumbest things anyone ever came up with. Who the f**k are you to decide how much someone can or can't make? If you're so convinced that oil companies are screwing you then buy stock and take part in it jacka**.

you cant read... i said as much as im against them..... when you make 10 billion in profits every quarter and gas is at 3 bucks.... somthing is wrong....!

[Logical]

The amount the United States borrows compared to the GDP is around 3%.... not bad at all.... compare that your home loan!

I don't know if I believe GDP is 14 trillion dollars do you have a link?

[Logical]

I don't know if I believe GDP is 14 trillion dollars do you have a link?Never mind Deface provided one. You should pay attention to his point though.

[the Talking Can]

Going from 432 Billion to 296 Billion in predicted deficits in one year is great... The Bush tax cuts are working!

this describes the fantasy world republicans live in perfectly....just ****ing priceless...there is no history, just the present - which always happens to be proof of the King's excellence....

now we just need Kotter to explain how Bush's budget management is like Australia appeasing Hitler in the War of Roses...or something...












"reality has a well known liberal bias"

[banyon]

Do these deficit projections include Iraq and Afghanistan. AFAIK, To date, Bush has excluded them from budget projections and kept them in supplemental authorizations to sway these numbers. Are they still doing this?

[Baby Lee]

this describes the fantasy world republicans live in perfectly....just ****ing priceless...there is no history, just the present - which always happens to be proof of the King's excellence....
We get is TC, when it's not 'your guy' in there, bad news are 'the cold hard facts' for which he needs to be held accountable, and good news is 'fantasy' which we all need to wake up and see through.

Thank you for your sober, and sobering, appraisal.

[ck_IN]

That's good. But now if only Congress, on both sides of the aisle, would quite spending like drunken sailors then we could really attack the national debt.

[the Talking Can]

We get is TC, when it's not 'your guy' in there, bad news are 'the cold hard facts' for which he needs to be held accountable, and good news is 'fantasy' which we all need to wake up and see through.

Thank you for your sober, and sobering, appraisal.

uh?

are you, or recxjake, going to present the history of Bush's debt and deficits?

no, of course not....facts iz libral hogwash....

are you going to discuss which numbers Bush includes and excludes to come up with these funny stats?

no, details iz libral prupuhganda...

example #3,678,897 of people talking about anything - anything - but the reality of Bush's administration.....yeah, let's have another meta-conversation about subject X...or talk about an article with providing the obvious context that would render it absurd...

[jAZ]

I can dig that.
BushCo has historically deliberately overstated the January estimates figures so that they can claim some sort of "victory" with their revised estimates. Tools like Jake don't mind.

http://nationaljournal.com/members/buzz/2006/budget/011706.htm
The Bush administration held a conference call with reporters last week to say that the 2006 deficit would be $400 billion or more. As the White House hoped, the media dutifully reported that number. But, as it almost certainly did not want, the media also reported that this latest Bush administration budget pronouncement should be treated with doubt, skepticism, and perhaps even outright contempt. The reason is that this president has a well-established history of overstating the deficit early in the year and then taking credit when it turns out to be lower than projected, even if it has done nothing to make that happen...

[oldandslow]

BushCo has historically deliberately overstated the January estimates figures so that they can claim some sort of "victory" with their revised estimates. Tools like Jake don't mind.

http://nationaljournal.com/members/buzz/2006/budget/011706.htm
The Bush administration held a conference call with reporters last week to say that the 2006 deficit would be $400 billion or more. As the White House hoped, the media dutifully reported that number. But, as it almost certainly did not want, the media also reported that this latest Bush administration budget pronouncement should be treated with doubt, skepticism, and perhaps even outright contempt. The reason is that this president has a well-established history of overstating the deficit early in the year and then taking credit when it turns out to be lower than projected, even if it has done nothing to make that happen...

Bingo...

He does this every year...

all the while the deficit goes up and up and up...

At the time they announced it (in Feb) I told my wife that the deficit would be somewhere around 300 mil and they would claim it as a great economic indicator...

further, they still are not including Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Iowanian]

Is it now "the talking jaz"?

[DaKCMan AP]

I predict that the Chiefs loss deficit will reach 12 games this season, resulting in a 4-12 record. Then in January when we are 9-7 or better, even if we don't make the playoffs, I can claim that the season was a TREMENDOUS success!!!!

BRILLIANT!

[Radar Chief]

We get is TC, when it's not 'your guy' in there, bad news are 'the cold hard facts' for which he needs to be held accountable, and good news is 'fantasy' which we all need to wake up and see through.

Thank you for your sober, and sobering, appraisal.

Well, if it helps any I’ve seen tTC bitch just as loud ‘bout Clinton as teh Debil, so if anything he’s consistent in that’e bitch’s ‘bout everything. :shrug: Course, in most circles that’d make’im a bitch, but whatever. ;)

[Chief Henry]

Is it now "the talking jaz"?


Its the talking Jiz...

[Bootlegged]

http://www.durfee.net/will/images/Jack7.jpg


It's JUST jIZ.

[the Talking Can]

it's "bitching" to point out that Bush has set record debt and deficeits? to point out that recxjake is un-informed?

facts = bitching...to republicans....

I just need to check...Bush is President? right?

listening to you guys, I'm not so sure...

[Radar Chief]

it's "bitching" to point out that Bush has set record debt and deficeits? to point out that recxjake is un-informed?

facts = bitching...to republicans....

I just need to check...Bush is President? right?

listening to you guys, I'm not so sure...

No, you incessantly bitch’n = bitch.
Though I can see why you’d wanna play this off as some teh Debil lacky dribble, that’s a lot easier than admitt’n all you do is bitch. ROFL

[Radar Chief]

No, you incessantly bitch’n = bitch.
Though I can see why you’d wanna play this off as some teh Debil lacky dribble, that’s a lot easier than admitt’n all you do is bitch. ROFL

Maybe I should rephrase that. How’s ‘bout, if it weren’t for bitch’n you’d have no online personality.
That help?



ROFL

[oldandslow]

TC--

I really don't think RW'ers have much left to say. The entire thing is going to hell in a handbasket and the guy who they voted for provided the gasoline.

So the neo cons attack LW and true libertarian-conservative members of the board - whether its meme or logical or nightwish or you.

[Bootlegged]

TC--

I really don't think RW'ers have much left to say. The entire thing is going to hell in a handbasket and the guy who they voted for provided the gasoline.

So the neo cons attack LW and true libertarian-conservative members of the board - whether its meme or logical or nightwish or you.



or you, Penchief.

[htismaqe]

it's "bitching" to point out that Bush has set record debt and deficeits? to point out that recxjake is un-informed?

facts = bitching...to republicans....

I just need to check...Bush is President? right?

listening to you guys, I'm not so sure...

It goes both ways, especially here.

[htismaqe]

TC--

I really don't think RW'ers have much left to say. The entire thing is going to hell in a handbasket and the guy who they voted for provided the gasoline.

So the neo cons attack LW and true libertarian-conservative members of the board - whether its meme or logical or nightwish or you.

Who are the "true" libertarians that are being attacked? They haven't attacked me...

[Pitt Gorilla]

$296 billion deficit for this year is a good thing?

[oldandslow]

'mageI would argue Jim is a libertarian. I don't know your views on foreign policy - libertarians, I would argue, are not in favor of foreign intervention.

[oldandslow]

$296 billion deficit for this year is a good thing?

Only if you lower expectations in Feb by stating the deficit will be 400 bil.

It's called doublespeak or newspeak.

Orwell knew what he was talking about when he penned 1984.

[htismaqe]

'mageI would argue Jim is a libertarian. I don't know your views on foreign policy - libertarians, I would argue, are not in favor of foreign intervention.

I would agree with you that libertarians, by and large, are not in favor of foreign intervention.

I would NOT agree with you that Jim is a libertarian.

[oldandslow]

You may correct me, but I basically thought Jim was for less taxation, against the war on drugs, pro choice, against government intervention in private lives, against the war etc.

Where does he deviate from the libertarian platform?

[oldandslow]

Here is what the Columbia Journal Review had to say about the budget escapades.

http://www.cjrdaily.org/politics/wag_that_tail_fido_its_july.php

Old Dog, Old Tricks
Wag That Tail, Fido; It's July
Felix Gillette
We all know that you can't teach an old dog new tricks, but it turns out you also can't get him to drop his old tricks. Especially, when the dog in question is the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). And the trick in question is OMB's deeply-ingrained reflex of eagerly wagging its tail -- perhaps "frantically spinning" is the better description -- every time it reports on the federal budget deficit.


To wit: On Tuesday, Robert Portman the head of the OMB is expected to release the annual mid-session forecast on the federal budget deficit.


According to various news reports in recent days, Portman's announcement will be brimming with good news--specifically, the news that, thanks to increasing tax revenue from an increasingly healthy economy, the federal budget deficit will be significantly lower in 2006 than OMB's own predictions made earlier this year.


"The White House Office of Management and Budget is expected to announce Tuesday that, because of the increased tax receipts, the deficit will be about $100 billion less than what was projected six months ago," Bloomberg News reported.


Sound familiar? It should.


That's more or less the exact trick the OMB trotted out for the media this time last year. Witness the following account in the Financial Times from July 2005.


"After several years of embarrassing budget figures, the Bush administration yesterday had good news to report," noted the Times. "The administration, which released its mid-session budget review yesterday, boosted its forecasts for tax revenues following stronger than expected tax receipts to date in the fiscal year that ends in September."


"It cut its forecast for the fiscal 2005 budget deficit to Dollars 333bn...less than the forecast it released in February and a sharp reduction from the Dollars 412bn deficit in 2004," added the Times.


That announcement, in turn, came on the heels of the OMB's cheerful forecast one year earlier that the federal budget deficit in 2004 was turning out to be significantly less than--surprise, surprise--earlier predictions.


"And today, the White House unveiled its midsession budget review estimates," reported NPR in July 2004. "It showed a budget deficit of $445 billion for this year, up from 374 billion in fiscal 2003. But Joshua Bolten, President Bush's budget director, presented it as good news because it's $76 billion less than the White House projected in February."


In recent years, many media outlets simply ran with the OMB's cheerful mid-session reports--tossing in plenty of laudatory quotes from presidential supporters praising the deficit "reduction" as vindication that the administration's fiscal policies were now turning a corner.


"These new numbers offer 94 billion examples of tax cuts at work, supporting economic growth and deficit reduction," Pat Toomey, president of the Club for Growth told the Financial Times after the "good news" in 2005. "Once again we are seeing the proof that supply-side economics work."


Not to mention proof that the OMB officials aren't shy about reverting to their favorite political ploy, year after year after year.


Recently, however, journalists appear to be catching on. As we noted previously, the Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman did a nice job of calling out the White House back in January when it released its predictably gloomy budget-deficit projections for the current fiscal year.


"This is the third straight year in which the White House has summoned reporters well ahead of the official budget release to project a higher-than-anticipated deficit," reported Weisman at the time. "In the past two years, when final deficit figures have come in at record or near-record levels, White House officials have boasted that they had made progress, since the final numbers were below estimates."


Make that three years in a row.


Let's hope that this time around more reporters will follow Weisman's lead and call out the OMB's "good news" about the federal budget deficit for what it really is--a dog and pony show. And a tired, predictable one, at that.

[htismaqe]

You may correct me, but I basically thought Jim was for less taxation, against the war on drugs, pro choice, against government intervention in private lives, against the war etc.

Where does he deviate from the libertarian platform?

I guess I see "old" Jim vs. "current" Jim, having shared a BB with him for almost a decade. "Old" Jim was definitely a libertarian.

"Current" Jim seems to be against whatever the majority seem to be for. "Current" Jim is more contrarian than libertarian, IMO.

[Baby Lee]

facts = bitching...to republicans....
TC--

I really don't think RW'ers have much left to say. The entire thing is going to hell in a handbasket and the guy who they voted for provided the gasoline.
Wow, when you lay out, so plainly and cogently, 'the entire thing' and demonstrate in simple irrefutable terms how it's 'going to hell' and further establish that 'a handbasket' is in fact the procedural vehicle, when you present FACTS like that, it's kind of hard to accuse anyone of just plain bitchin'.

So the neo cons attack LW and true libertarian-conservative members of the board - whether its meme or logical or nightwish or you.
Look at this thread and tell me, honestly. Did this start off as an attack on the likes of Logical and TC. Or, . . did it start off as a genial "good start. . . now lets cut down on spending. . etc." only to degenerate into attacks, . . . oh . . . about the time Logical and TC started calling people deluded stooges?

[oldandslow]

Baby Lee:

The administration is using rhetorical tricks to hide a huge problem that they have had for years - i.e., deficit spending.

This "headline" was in no way good news. That it was being utilized as such needed to be pointed out.

Second. Things are not going well. Gasoline is headed for 3.50/4.00 a gallon. Fifty people are dying in Bahgdad every day. Inflation is rearing its ugly head. North Korea is building nukes. So is Iran. Hell, the prez is going to even veto stem cell research.

Not all of this is Bush's fault (esp gas/oil) However, it is still how I think most Americans would describe hell in a handbasket.

[Baby Lee]

Not all of this is Bush's fault (esp gas/oil) However, it is still how I think most Americans would describe hell in a handbasket.
If you think 2006 America is 'hell in a handbasket' you have;

0 perspective,
0 resiliance, or
a vested interest in poormouthing.

[oldandslow]

If you think 2006 America is 'hell in a handbasket' you have;

0 perspective,
0 resiliance, or
a vested interest in poormouthing.

Oh, please. I was using hyperbole and you know it. By using Reagan's old "misery index" I am pointing out that things are not going as well as could be hoped or had even during Clinton.

That you fail to recognize that illustrates your own blinders.

[Brock]

If you think 2006 America is 'hell in a handbasket' you have;

0 perspective,
0 resiliance, or
a vested interest in poormouthing.

I'm still waiting for that real estate bubble to pop. He's been calling for that for 18 months. Of course, in "Middle of BFE, South Dakota", maybe all the funds have dried up.

[Baby Lee]

Oh, please. I was using hyperbole and you know it.
hyperbole ≠ facts

Whose side are you on, anyways? :p

[patteeu]

'mageI would argue Jim is a libertarian. I don't know your views on foreign policy - libertarians, I would argue, are not in favor of foreign intervention.

Right, the true kind. ROFL

[Logical]

I would agree with you that libertarians, by and large, are not in favor of foreign intervention.

I would NOT agree with you that Jim is a libertarian.I would say I am not a contrarian either. I have been pretty consistent over the years in my approach.

I am against isolationism

I am pro choice

I am against interference of religion in government

I am basically for reduced taxes but I am willing to increase them if the cause merits it such as Katrina.

I am against trying to establish governmments at our whim

I was for the overthrow of Saddam but against the occupation

I am morally liberal

I am for the legalization but taxation of drugs

I am for the smoking bans and always have been

I am against the loss of our rights in the name of the terrorism scare tactics

I am against Federal Education control

I am for requiring work to collect welfare

In short I am a centrist that has views that fall on both sides of the political spectrum and always have been. Sometimes far right and sometimes far left

[mlyonsd]

When guys Jim's age start banging on social security 296 billion is going to seem like walk around money.

[Hydrae]

And we wonder why Americans in general are more in debt each and every year. Maybe they learn by watching the idiots in DC and figure if they can spend more than they bring in, why can't we?

[stevieray]

And we wonder why Americans in general are more in debt each and every year. Maybe they learn by watching the idiots in DC and figure if they can spend more than they bring in, why can't we?

Americans are in debt because of materialism.

You are one of the last people i thought I'd see trying to push that off onto the government.

I find it ironic that so many don't want government involved in their lives, yet government is the first place they go to blame their misgivings on.

[Hydrae]

Americans are in debt because of materialism.

You are one of the last people i thought I'd see trying to push that off onto the government.

I find it ironic that so many don't want government involved in their lives, yet government is the first place they go to blame their misgivings on.

I would just like to see some leadership by example. The current example (and I know, this is far from a new problem) is horrible. That is all I meant.

Yes, materialism is exactly the problem of people as individuals. I am certainly guilty of a certain amount of it myself. This is probably due to our television culture more than anything else. But that doesn't make an excuse for anyone, as an individual or as an entity like a business or our government to spend into a hole.

[recxjake]

For those of you saying that Bush made these numbers up...... WRONG.... the OMB and a non political group ran the numbers.... Pro Growth Taxes equal more reveunue in the long run!

[KC Jones]

Yeah... so we're only going to outspend by our revenue by $300 billion. Well break out the ****ing champagne - all our problems are solved.

:shake:

[|Zach|]

Yeah... so we're only going to outspend by our revenue by $300 billion. Well break out the ****ing champagne - all our problems are solved.

:shake:
ROFL

[tk13]

ROFL I have to admit, when I read this thread title in the little box at the top of the Lounge... I thought it was just another sarcastic Jaz thread. Then I come in here and see it's actual gloating.

[Ugly Duck]

Play the "National Budget Simulation" game. You can increase or decrease taxes in the simulation and see the results:

"According to the Congressional Budget Office, the 2006 fiscal deficit is projected to be $296 billion. This does not include the costs of the Iraq War, so in the simulation the deficit has been increased by $105 billion, the costs of the supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan operation for fiscal 2005, for a total projected deficit of $401 billion. These costs and the associated deficits can be adjusted in the similuation based on your estimates of the likely continuing costs of the war or whether to scale back or end those operations.

The Simulation also allows you to adjust the costs of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, either cutting or cancelling them to raise revenue, or increasing them to create larger tax cuts. It also allows you to increase or decrease tax expenditures, also known as tax deductions, credits or "loopholes."


http://www.budgetsim.org/nbs/

[oldandslow]

I am going to suggest this...I don't know if it is true.

Just like Nixon going to China or Clinton doing welfare reform, perhaps it can only be economic moderate dems like Bayh or Warner or Clinton that CAN perform the magic that is a balanced budget.

Again, I am only saying that it is a possibility.

However, the examplars of Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush jr. certainly seem to point that way.

[penchief]

If you take Iraq/Afghanistan + Katrina out of the mix... it would be in the 100 billion range

At the same time if you take Iraq/Afghanistan + Katrina out of the mix.....the wartime elitist economy doesn't look so good, either.

[Dave Lane]

Wow only $300 billion deficit! WooHooo its party time. Call me when we get a surplus.

And it only Slightly better than last year wow what great news.

Dave

[BIG_DADDY]

. Call me when we get a surplus.



Dave

Never happen with bankers running the world. Nothing like easy/free money.

[penchief]

Never happen with bankers running the world. Nothing like easy/free money.

That's what it's all about these days; money for nothing. We're an investor nation, baby! Corporate Welfare and freedom from regulation are boons for the monied interests.

People are even starting to pay for services that used to be considered obligatory customer or employee services; things that used to be considered part of doing business honestly. For example, being charged by a bank for making inquiries about one's own money!

I had a mind-blowing experience while verifying the employment and income of a Home Depot employee. Home Depot has hired an agency to do this job. As a verifyee, I have to set up an account with this company that they hired to do their verifications. Then I get charged for the inquiry. Unbelievable.

The way things are trending, I'm beginning to believe that "Money for Nothing" ought to be this country's motto.

[Baby Lee]

That's what it's all about these days; money for nothing. We're an investor nation, baby! Corporate Welfare and freedom from regulation are boons for the monied interests.

People are even starting to pay for services that used to be considered obligatory customer or employee services; things that used to be considered part of doing business honestly. For example, being charged by a bank for making inquiries about one's own money!
Put it in your mattress and count it yourself.

[penchief]

Put it in your mattress and count it yourself.

That's hardly the point.

[Radar Chief]

That's hardly the point.

‘Cause it’s already in a coffee can over the fridge, right? ;)

ROFL

[BIG_DADDY]

That's what it's all about these days; money for nothing. We're an investor nation, baby! Corporate Welfare and freedom from regulation are boons for the monied interests.

People are even starting to pay for services that used to be considered obligatory customer or employee services; things that used to be considered part of doing business honestly. For example, being charged by a bank for making inquiries about one's own money!

I had a mind-blowing experience while verifying the employment and income of a Home Depot employee. Home Depot has hired an agency to do this job. As a verifyee, I have to set up an account with this company that they hired to do their verifications. Then I get charged for the inquiry. Unbelievable.

The way things are trending, I'm beginning to believe that "Money for Nothing" ought to be this country's motto.

You should read Creature from Jekyll Island sometime.

[Baby Lee]

That's hardly the point.
What, that you used to get services for free that are no longer free?
It's a service economy. People expend time and effort to accomodate your needs. Why should people who don't need updates on their money every day subsidize your particular needs with higher service fees?
Your take is the first cousin of the folks who steal music and movies online because 'the dang thangs are too expensive anyways.'

[penchief]

What, that you used to get services for free that are no longer free?
It's a service economy. People expend time and effort to accomodate your needs. Why should people who don't need updates on their money every day subsidize your particular needs with higher service fees?
Your take is the first cousin of the folks who steal music and movies online because 'the dang thangs are too expensive anyways.'

Absolutely not. If a bank is soliciting my money so that they can make their own money off the back of my earnings, I should not have to pay a fee to have an official inquiry made into the status of my account.

By the way, I'm not complaining for myself and I'm not talking about the one dollar fee for a printout of one's banking activity. I'm talking about the $15/$20 fee that more and more banks are beginning to charge when official inquiries are made into the status of one's finances. Not all inquiries are made because some idiot doesn't know how to balance their checkbook.

I make sure I take my business where I'm most comfortable. All I'm sayin is that if they want my business, solicit my business, and benefit from my money then they shouldn't be looking for additional ways to gouge people. To me, it's no different than the double-dipping that credit card companies and banks do when the charge 25% interest on a credit card and charge an additional $30 late fee on a $25 minimum payment.

They're damn crooks, period. Their greedy practices are beginning to define America, IMO.

[Brock]

To me, it's no different than the double-dipping that credit card companies and banks do when the charge 25% interest on a credit card and charge an additional $30 late fee on a $25 minimum payment.

Ha ha. What kind of moron pays interest on a credit card?

[Baby Lee]

Absolutely not. If a bank is soliciting my money so that they can make their own money off the back of my earnings, I should not have to pay a fee to have an official inquiry made into the status of my account.
If that's your stance, insist on it before you deposit.
When you make an inquiry, does someone expend effort to answer it?

[penchief]

Ha ha. What kind of moron pays interest on a credit card?

I'm not saying it's smart or even that I do. But that doesn't make it right for them to screw other people. Throughout history, there have been times when excessive usury charges have been illegal.

The way things are going, though, the average person is losing ground when it comes to mastering their own financial fate. Those of lesser means are often left with limited choices that play into the hands of those who have influenced the rules for the purpose of exploitating those who can afford it least.

[BIG_DADDY]

Absolutely not. If a bank is soliciting my money so that they can make their own money off the back of my earnings, I should not have to pay a fee to have an official inquiry made into the status of my account.

By the way, I'm not complaining for myself and I'm not talking about the one dollar fee for a printout of one's banking activity. I'm talking about the $15/$20 fee that more and more banks are beginning to charge when official inquiries are made into the status of one's finances. Not all inquiries are made because some idiot doesn't know how to balance their checkbook.

I make sure I take my business where I'm most comfortable. All I'm sayin is that if they want my business, solicit my business, and benefit from my money then they shouldn't be looking for additional ways to gouge people. To me, it's no different than the double-dipping that credit card companies and banks do when the charge 25% interest on a credit card and charge an additional $30 late fee on a $25 minimum payment.

They're damn crooks, period. Their greedy practices are beginning to define America, IMO.

I think your getting a little carried away. I have a much bigger problem with the fact that the banking industry has basically been a monopoly ever since the great depression and the creation of the Federal Reserve. They should call it what it really is the Banking Cartel.

[Baby Lee]

I'm not saying it's smart or even that I do. But that doesn't make it right for them to screw other people. Throughout history, there have been times when excessive usury charges have been illegal.

The way things are going, though, the average person is losing ground when it comes to mastering their own financial fate. Those of lesser means are often left with limited choices that play into the hands of those who have influenced the rules for the purpose of exploitating those who can afford it least.
The MAN made me put that TV, and dinner out, and my new shoes, and my telephone bill, and my cell phone bill, and my mastercard, ON MY VISA!!!

[penchief]

If that's your stance, insist on it before you deposit.
When you make an inquiry, does someone expend effort to answer it?

My bank doesn't do it but I run into it enough and it is becoming the trend.

[penchief]

The MAN made me put that TV, and dinner out, and my new shoes, and my telephone bill, and my cell phone bill, and my mastercard, ON MY VISA!!!

I understand what you're getting at. I am as big an advocate of personal responsibility as anyone on this board. I practice it in my own life. But, I also believe it's counterproductive to deny the fact that a large portion of hardworking, conscientious Americans are getting squeezed by the New Economy in a way that leads to debt. Confindence and hope can inspire many people to believe that their indebtedness is only temporary.

[KC Dan]

I understand what you're getting at. I am as big an advocate of personal responsibility as anyone on this board. I practice it in my own life. But, I also believe it's counterproductive to deny the fact that a large portion of hardworking, conscientious Americans are getting squeezed by the New Economy in a way that leads to debt. Confindence and hope can inspire many people to believe that their indebtedness is only temporary.
I'd love to agree with you but I can't. People are building debt by keeping up with the Joneses and trying to keep up with kids (stuff) competition.

[penchief]

If that's your stance, insist on it before you deposit.
When you make an inquiry, does someone expend effort to answer it?

Yes, an effort is made. But at the same time, whether it be a banking arrangement or an employer/employee arrangement, it is understood that their is a mutual benefit. Up until recently, a couple of those understandings have been:

1. It's okay to look at your own money without being charged.

2. We'll tell people you work for us without being charged.

I'm just saying. Where does it stop?

[penchief]

I'd love to agree with you but I can't. People are building debt by keeping up with the Joneses and trying to keep up with kids (stuff) competition.

Not everybody. I know people whose situations have forced them to use their credit cards to pay their bills and buy gas. In fact, it's common enough that I can't believe you deny it with a straight face or that it seems to be beyond your comprehension.

Not everybody tries to keep up with the Joneses. There are a lot of down-to-earth people in this country. Many of whom are struggling to get by. And considering the way the scales have been tilted in favor of the energy, oil, banking, and medical industries lately, the problem has been compounded.

JMO.

[patteeu]

The way things are going, though, the average person is losing ground when it comes to mastering their own financial fate.

I thought that's what you pragmatic people wanted in the first place. (And when I say "pragmatic people" I mean "socialists"). :p

[penchief]

I thought that's what you pragmatic people wanted in the first place. (And when I say "pragmatic people" I mean "socialists"). :p

I guess that's where we have a miscommunication. We agree that humans should be the masters of their own fate but I believe that true "free enterprise" is not possible without equal opportunity or equal access.

Those people with power and wealth should not be allowed to administer roadblocks or hurdles that prevent other equally capable, but less fortunate, people from competing for jobs and wealth.

Government should be a vehicle for advocating equal opportunity and not a vehicle for greasing the skids for the power elite or rigging the rules in order to consolidate more wealth and power at the expense of the average person's ambitions. That's why they call it America.

JMO.

[patteeu]

I guess that's where we have a miscommunication. We agree that humans should be the masters of their own fate but I believe that true "free enterprise" is not possible without equal opportunity or equal access.

Those people with power and wealth should not be allowed to administer roadblocks or hurdles that prevent other equally capable, but less fortunate, people from competing for jobs and wealth.

Government should be a vehicle for advocating equal opportunity and not a vehicle for greasing the skids for the power elite or rigging the rules in order to consolidate more wealth and power at the expense of the average person's ambitions. That's why they call it America.

JMO.

I thought it was called America because of Amerigo Vespucci. ;)

You're wrong about virtually everything political, penchief, but for some reason I still like you. :)

[htismaqe]

I guess that's where we have a miscommunication. We agree that humans should be the masters of their own fate but I believe that true "free enterprise" is not possible without equal opportunity or equal access.

Those people with power and wealth should not be allowed to administer roadblocks or hurdles that prevent other equally capable, but less fortunate, people from competing for jobs and wealth.

Government should be a vehicle for advocating equal opportunity and not a vehicle for greasing the skids for the power elite or rigging the rules in order to consolidate more wealth and power at the expense of the average person's ambitions. That's why they call it America.

JMO.

Well, the power elite became powerful somehow. It's not like it was never earned, it just wasn't earned by those currently in power -- it was inherited.

200+ years of "freedom" and 1000 years of human enlightenment, yet we've never gotten away from the feudal system.