100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
| Topic: Spendocrats pushing US towards abyss.. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says..
President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall. The 10-year outlook released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is somewhat gloomier than White House projections, which found that Obama's budget request would produce deficits that would add about $8.5 trillion to the national debt by 2020. The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year -- a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy -- and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama's policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015. Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period. Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. As part of his campaign pledge to protect families making less than $250,000 a year from new taxes, the president is proposing to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to ensnare millions of additional taxpayers. He also wants to make permanent a series of tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. "Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. Obama is convening a special commission to bring deficits down to 3 percent of the economy, but the CBO report shows that Obama could accomplish that goal simply by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and paying for changes to the alternative minimum tax. Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030502974.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says.. President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall. The 10-year outlook released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is somewhat gloomier than White House projections, which found that Obama's budget request would produce deficits that would add about $8.5 trillion to the national debt by 2020. The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year -- a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy -- and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama's policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015. Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period. Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. As part of his campaign pledge to protect families making less than $250,000 a year from new taxes, the president is proposing to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to ensnare millions of additional taxpayers. He also wants to make permanent a series of tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. "Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. Obama is convening a special commission to bring deficits down to 3 percent of the economy, but the CBO report shows that Obama could accomplish that goal simply by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and paying for changes to the alternative minimum tax. Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030502974.html I listened to this report last night.....dear God when is it all going to end? And, I do not think obama is gong to like this information being given out.........after all, he loves to quote the CBO whenever he can twist the words around to make it look like the CBO is on his side........pathetic........ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says.. President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall. The 10-year outlook released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is somewhat gloomier than White House projections, which found that Obama's budget request would produce deficits that would add about $8.5 trillion to the national debt by 2020. The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year -- a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy -- and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama's policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015. Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period. Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. As part of his campaign pledge to protect families making less than $250,000 a year from new taxes, the president is proposing to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to ensnare millions of additional taxpayers. He also wants to make permanent a series of tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. "Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. Obama is convening a special commission to bring deficits down to 3 percent of the economy, but the CBO report shows that Obama could accomplish that goal simply by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and paying for changes to the alternative minimum tax. Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030502974.html I listened to this report last night.....dear God when is it all going to end? And, I do not think obama is gong to like this information being given out.........after all, he loves to quote the CBO whenever he can twist the words around to make it look like the CBO is on his side........pathetic........ He will just send out the left wing shock troops with the Blame Bush message.. Come back later and you'll see them in full force.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
National debt to be higher than White House forecast, CBO says.. President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall. The 10-year outlook released by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is somewhat gloomier than White House projections, which found that Obama's budget request would produce deficits that would add about $8.5 trillion to the national debt by 2020. The CBO and the White House are in relative agreement about the short-term budget picture, with both predicting a deficit of about $1.5 trillion this year -- a post-World War II record at 10.3 percent of the overall economy -- and $1.3 trillion in 2011. But the CBO is considerably less optimistic about future years, predicting that deficits would never fall below 4 percent of the economy under Obama's policies and would begin to grow rapidly after 2015. Deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90 percent of the economy by 2020, the CBO said. Interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period. Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. As part of his campaign pledge to protect families making less than $250,000 a year from new taxes, the president is proposing to prevent the alternative minimum tax from expanding to ensnare millions of additional taxpayers. He also wants to make permanent a series of tax cuts enacted during the Bush administration, which are scheduled to expire at the end of this year. "Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. Obama is convening a special commission to bring deficits down to 3 percent of the economy, but the CBO report shows that Obama could accomplish that goal simply by letting the Bush tax cuts expire and paying for changes to the alternative minimum tax. Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/05/AR2010030502974.html I listened to this report last night.....dear God when is it all going to end? And, I do not think obama is gong to like this information being given out.........after all, he loves to quote the CBO whenever he can twist the words around to make it look like the CBO is on his side........pathetic........ He will just send out the left wing shock troops with the Blame Bush message.. Come back later and you'll see them in full force.. This is hilarious... I posted this almost exactly 1 year ago.. Now look at the "here is a poll I find interesting" thread... You leftists are so predictable.. LMMFAO |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Sat 03/05/11 10:23 AM
|
|
Republican humor. Good one, I guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republican humor. Good one, I guess. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Size of government...
and the resulting ammont of money that government needs to survive is what created this debt. If people don't start reducing that size... There will be nothing left of America except the Government. No market. No personal home ownership. No private cars. No LLC's or sole proprietor companies. No Corporations (that are not government controlled and managed). No Unions. No wages or earnings. No rights. The government has reached the point where it must consume our personal needs (and make us all 'employees'). The people that want to be 'on top' of that monstrous creature will then have no choice but to dictate our every living function... But pursuit of that 'power' is their goal... and they are using us all to accomplish it. (and there are 'members' of the 'pursuit of power' group in every party) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and the resulting ammont of money that government needs to survive is what created this debt. That's not true. It is a result of the relentless drive to reduce taxes, Especially for those who least need tax cuts. You can say this as many times as you want, Repetition does not make it true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and the resulting ammont of money that government needs to survive is what created this debt. That's not true. It is a result of the relentless drive to reduce taxes, Especially for those who least need tax cuts. You can say this as many times as you want, Repetition does not make it true. Not true. There is absolutely no need for income taxation whatsoever if congress/the executive branch would stay within their respective constitutional bounds. Americans thrived and lived very well prior to the federal income tax, in fact. (including the poor, who still live like royalty in comparison to the poor in the vast majority of the world) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
AdventureBegins
on
Sat 03/05/11 08:34 PM
|
|
and the resulting ammont of money that government needs to survive is what created this debt. That's not true. It is a result of the relentless drive to reduce taxes, Especially for those who least need tax cuts. You can say this as many times as you want, Repetition does not make it true. How many years did the US do great... WITHOUT AN INCOME TAX? What I said is quite true. Our Government has gone from governing to absorbing, regulating, controlling, coddling, GROWING, and ... instead of promoting the common welfare... it has BECOME the single largest EMPLOYEER of citizens in the Nation... When exactaly did our founders intend the Federal Government to become a Corporation. Isn't there a law against MONOPOLIES? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is all im going to say. research numbers before you start beliving what ever you see off of the news. I see alot of stats being thrown around and know strong sources to back them up. it wouldnt make since for Obama to add over 10 trillion dollars to the national debt by 2020 its be political suicide. if you researsh all of obama's plans they all are recover moves that hit our econemy hard at 1st but let the free hand of the market correct itself. thats high school economics
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free hand of the market is 'bound' by the government, the unions, the shareholders.
There is no 'free' hand in the market right now. and the stats I posted came right from the 'demographic' statistics of the Federal Government ... I just did not post them in the 'sequences' the government did because they are scattered over several 'agencies'. Very interesting how much actual information is out there if you 'mine' the appropriate agencies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah... Almost forgot.
Government spending will not 'boost' an economy from a depression or resession... Historical fact. Neither will increasing taxes. (that will 'slow' the process of recovery)... Also historical fact... College Macroeconomics. Economics in its simply form only works in small markets or Corporations/Corporate groups. Larger markets require one to understand the dynamics of the population that is serviced by the markets. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
artlo
on
Mon 03/07/11 06:08 AM
|
|
As I recall, Macro-economics is the first semester of Econ 101, a freshman level course. T'his is followed by a second semester of micro-economics.
In order to get into my MBA program, I had to go back and pick up a second year of Economics. Once into the MBA program, just about everything you study involves Economics. That first semester of freshman Economics is a wonderful course, and is a great introduction into the academic world of Economics. I had to snicker when I ran across this web page. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100617231143AAcVT0f |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Micro economics apply to the simply corporate structure and its effect on local economy.
Macro economics understanding is necessary to 'meld' the various micro groups that exist within a larger group structure. Thinking inside the box that academia has created arround every aspect of education will lead to 'more of the same'... Where whould our science be if scientists studied only the micro interactions of the atom... Without also attempting to understand the Macrointeractions of all atoms? MBA's obviously do not have the answers to our current situation... Indeed, depending upon which school the MBA was awarded there is considerable differing opinions as to the 'proper' course foward. |
|
|
|
|
