New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Did Obama say he'd CUT the deficit 2 trillion dollars? His bad...

Dino

Russian Asset
Only off by a mere 5 or 6 TRILLION huh?

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/07/obamas-health-care-news-conference/

The president claimed he has cut federal spending by more than $2 trillion.

Obama: I am very worried about federal spending. And the steps that we’ve taken so far have reduced federal spending over the next 10 years by $2.2 trillion.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office doesn’t agree that Obama’s budget has “reduced federal spending” at all. Quite the opposite. His budget calls for vastly increased spending, according to CBO.

Last month CBO estimated that total federal spending, without the changes Obama proposed in his budget, would be just under $39 trillion over the next 10 years. It also estimated that if Congress adopted the president’s budget, spending would increase to more than $41.7 trillion over the same period. As a percentage of the economy, CBO figured that federal spending would rise from 22.1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) under current law, to 23.7 percent under Obama’s budget proposals.

CBO specifically estimated the "total effect on outlays" of Obama’s budget as an increase of $2.7 trillion compared with what’s called for in current law. So by CBO’s figuring, spending would go up $2.7 trillion, not down $2.2 trillion. That would make Obama’s claim a nearly $5 trillion whopper.

Even the administration’s own projections don’t suport Obama’s extravagant claim of a $2.2 trillion spending cut. His Office of Management and Budget projected that Obama’s budget would produce $42.2 trillion in total outlays over the next 10 years. That’s only $431 billion more than CBO’s later estimate. However, Obama’s OMB comes up with a much higher prediction of where spending would be without the president’s budget. OMB figures "baseline" spending of $43.4 trillion. Compared with that, OMB figures that Obama’s budget would represent a reduction of more than $1.2 trillion. But that’s still nearly $1 trillion short of the figure Obama claimed.

Obama may have confused his deficit figures with his spending figures. Earlier he said that the projected deficit is "$2.2 trillion less than it would have been if we had the same policies in place when we came in." But even that is disputed. It’s true that OMB projected a $7.1 trillion, 10-year deficit under Obama’s budget, and a $9.3 trillion deficit if current policies continued unchanged. That would amount to a $2.2 trillion improvement. But congressional budget experts don’t agree with that. CBO projects a $9.1 trillion deficit under Obama’s budget, and a $4.4 trillion deficit under current law. In other words, CBO figures Obama’s budget would make the deficit $4.5 trillion worse, not $2.2 trillion better.
 
The Serial Liar In Chief. Bar none. From Harry "The Buck Stops Here!" Truman to Barack "George Bush Did It" Obama, the Democratic Party has, as in the cigarrette commercial "You've come a long way baby!", from being the "Arsenal of Democracy" to Nero fiddling while Rome burned.
 
Meanwhile, the CBO can't even 'score' Mitt Rmoney's budget 'plan', because he won't provide any specifics. But both the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget AND the National Tax Policy Center agree that Mitt Rmoney's policies, as he has stated them, would result in a much larger increase in the federal budget deficit, and hence the national debt, than President Obama's plan.
 
Is Mitt Romney President yet?

We have seen Obama in action, or, considering we do not run this country on a budget anymore, maybe his inaction would be more appropriate.

Tell me again how many Dems have voted for Obama's budgets.
 
With the runaway printing of money backed by nothing, soon we will ALL be millionaires.

Loaf of bread, $1.5 million, jar of peanut butter, $2 million, jar of jelly, $1 million, that would work out to about $350,000 per PBJ.

Let's all harken back to the Leftist Utopia of the Wiemar Republic.

You know what followed that, don't you?
 
No, I think any sane voter need do nothing but look at Obama's record.
 
So you're predicting hyper-inflation, huh?

When is that gonna happen? Because IT SURE AS HELL HAS NOT HAPPENED YET.

And people who actually understand how the economy works know why.
 
Sane voters look at facts. And the facts indicate that Mitt Rmoney and the policies he favors would cause the deficit and the debt to simply EXPLODE.
 
Of course, defecit and debt have not exploded under Obama?


Try again.
 
Try this:
Mitt Rmoney's Personal War On Arithmetic

From "The Week", a little blurb titled "Romney's Funny Numbers":

Mitt Rmoney has a math problem, said Doyle McManus [From a column in 'The Los Angeles Times'.] The Republican Presidential candidate is calling for trillions more in defense spending, while insisting he will cut taxes, protect Medicare, balance the budget, and reduce the national debt. It just doesn't add up. [That is certainly putting it mildly!--LeRoy.] Rmoney's been short on specifics, but he maintains that "core defense spending"---excluding the cost of wars---should reach 4 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, a hefty increase over the current 3.2 percent. That would mean an additional $2 trillion over the next 10 years. Rmoney says he would finance the military's growth by making drastic cuts in other federal spending [which he refuses to specify---LeRoy]---while giving everyone a 20 percent tax cut [on top of the Bush tax cuts already in place---LeRoy]. "A nice trick if he could pull it off, but it flies in the face of, well, arithmetic." The U.S. already spends more on defense than the next 10 nations combined [most of which are our allies---LeRoy], and has by far the world's mightiest military. The days of unlimited spending are over. If we must make cuts everywhere, does it really make sense to spend trillions more on weapons and soldiers?

LeRoy: Oh, sure, it might, if you were planning on another major war or two or three. But, yes, Mitt Rmoney's budgetary claims deeply violate the laws of arithmetic---something voters should have learned about in grade school. Did Republicans flunk fifth-grade arithmetic?

I guess you just can't do arithmetic, GreenRidgeMan. Where did you say you went to school?
 
This defines either "irony" or "hypocrisy".

Here's a liberal bitching that the CBO can't score ROMNEY'S budget plan, when his guy in the White House hasn't passed one in three years!
 
This defines either "irony" or "hypocrisy".

Here's a liberal bitching that the CBO can't score ROMNEY'S budget plan, when his guy in the White House hasn't passed one in three years!

LeRoy: It certainly DOES define 'irony' or 'hypocrisy'. The CBO can score Mr. Obama's budget plan, because he actually has one. Sheesh, you were discussing it in your top post. Yet they can't score Rmoney's 'budget plan', because he does not have one. We can only make estimates of what Rmoney's 'plans' would do to our fiscal balance based on his public statements.

Back in 1980, Ronald Reagan promised that he would (1) massively increase defense spending; (2) slash taxes; and (3) balance the budget. And the budget deficit exploded. You guys fell for it back then, for the first time. In 2000, George W. Bush promised he would slash taxes, and he promised it would not return us to an era of large budget deficits. Oops. You guys fell for it again, for the second time. And now, you're about to fall for it a third time, with Mitt Rmoney making essentially the same three idiotic promises as Ronnie RayGun.

Falling for a scam, the same scam, three times?!?? Just offhand, I would say that classifies you folks as being VERY stupid. I would think Internet scammers would have a field day with you. Hey, if you get any emails from a Nigerian banker promising you millions of dollars if you just send him a few thousand, go for it!!
 
More irony- cutting taxes and raising both debt and deficits is precisely what Obama is doing, he promised you different, and you're about to go out and vote for him again.

Hypocrite.
 
Let us all agree that GWB punched the USA in the face when he left behind his $1.3 trillion structural annual deficits.

Let us further agree never again to support the policies that drove us into that ditch.

Oh wait, you support Romney, huh?
 
It's the middle class, stupid! [Also the title of a new book by James Carville, so don't go filing a complaint that I'm calling you names.] Mr. Obama has cut taxes on the middle class. George W. Bush's tax cuts were targeted like a laser beam at America's wealthiest families. It was supposed to 'trickle down'---supposedly!---but never did.

The fact is that the responsible non-partisan budget analysis groups [such as the Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget and the National Tax Policy Center] agree that Mitt Rmoney's proposed plans would increase the deficit (and the debt) at a far more rapid rate than Obama's plan would. And that ought to be obvious to any thinking person......as long as, that is, they can do grade school arithmetic.
 
It's the middle class, stupid! [Also the title of a new book by James Carville, so don't go filing a complaint that I'm calling you names.] Mr. Obama has cut taxes on the middle class. George W. Bush's tax cuts were targeted like a laser beam at America's wealthiest families. It was supposed to 'trickle down'---supposedly!---but never did.

The fact is that the responsible non-partisan budget analysis groups [such as the Committee For A Responsible Federal Budget and the National Tax Policy Center] agree that Mitt Rmoney's proposed plans would increase the deficit (and the debt) at a far more rapid rate than Obama's plan would. And that ought to be obvious to any thinking person......as long as, that is, they can do grade school arithmetic.

Obama has not cut taxes on anyone. He has put millions of additional people on welfare but they pay no taxes anyway. If all these dumb f**ks, who think they are going to get free healthcare because of Obamacare, really knew what it's going to cost them, Obama wouldn't be ablr to buy a vote in November.
 
This defines either "irony" or "hypocrisy".

Here's a liberal bitching that the CBO can't score ROMNEY'S budget plan, when his guy in the White House hasn't passed one in three years!

Loks like you bought a Fox Noise/Hate Radio lie.

Obama has indeed proposed budgets.
 
Back
Top