Goldberg ignores Bush's responsibility for $1 trillion deficit in 2009
In a September 1 USA Today op-ed calling Republicans and Democrats "hypocrites for caring about the deficit," Jonah Goldberg wrote that "Obama's budget will have, for the first time, a single year deficit of $1 trillion," adding that "Obama's 2009 budget deficit will be greater than all of the Bush deficits from 2002 to 2007 combined." Absent from Goldberg's analysis was the fact that before President Obama took office or signed any legislation, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projected that, based on actions taken by President Bush and economic conditions at the time, the deficit for fiscal year 2009 would reach $1.2 trillion.
Goldberg: "Obama's budget will have, for the first time, a single year deficit of $1 trillion"
From Goldberg's September 1 USA Today op-ed:
Obama's budget will have, for the first time, a single year deficit of $1 trillion and, according to the Obama administration's own projections, the same stack will be over 600 miles high ($9 trillion) at the end of 10 years, and that might be optimistic. Obama's 2009 budget deficit will be greater than all of the Bush deficits from 2002 to 2007 combined, according to the Heritage Foundation's Brian Riedl. And none of this takes into account that Obama's health care ambitions, nevermind cap and trade, could swell the deficit much more, if realized. Nor does it take into account the fact that unless the economy revives, tax revenues will continue to plummet as they have been (this year saw the greatest drop-off of receipts since 1932), which would make the shortfall even worse.
Based on Bush's actions and economic conditions, CBO projected $1.2 trillion deficit on January 7
$1.2 trillion projection based on legislation Bush passed before Obama's inauguration. From CBO's January 2009 budget report, released on January 7:
The ongoing turmoil in the housing and financial markets has taken a major toll on the federal budget. CBO currently projects that the deficit this year will total $1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent of GDP. That total, however, does not include the effects of any future legislation. Enactment of an economic stimulus package, for example, would add to the 2009 deficit. In any event, as a percentage of GDP, the deficit will most likely shatter the previous post-World War II record high of 6.0 percent posted in 1983.
A drop in tax revenues and increased federal spending (much of it related to the government's actions to address the crisis in the housing and financial markets) both contribute to the robust growth in this year's deficit. Compared with receipts last year, collections from corporate income taxes are anticipated to decline by 27 percent and individual income taxes by 8 percent; in normal economic conditions, they would both grow by several percentage points. In addition, the estimated deficit includes outlays of more than $180 billion to reflect the cost of transactions of the TARP.
The projected deficit for 2009 also incorporates CBO's estimate of the cost to the federal government of the recent takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Because those entities were created and chartered by the government, are responsible for implementing certain government policies, and are currently under the direct control of the federal government, CBO has concluded that their operations should be reflected in the federal budget. Recognizing the cost of the takeover adds about $200 billion (in discounted present-value terms) to the deficit this year, reflecting the long-term net cost of the more than $5 trillion in credit guarantees issued and loans held by those entities at the start of the fiscal year. In addition, the cost of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's new credit activity in 2009 will total $38 billion, CBO estimates.
Last I looked 6 trillion is quite a bit more than 1.2 trillion for this years debt.
the moral of this is whatever you do don't let this right clown Goldberg balance your checkbook !
For some reason Republicans never know that Bush had $5 trillion in debt as it was never mentioned on FauxNews. Nor do they seem to recall the 2001 hearings on the surplus where there was palpable fear of paying off the federal debt in 8 years possibly causing deflation.
It was that largess that prompted the Bush tax cuts - also known as the Leave No Billionaire Behind, the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of the U.S. to the fewest number of people. The Koch family funding of AEI, Heritages, Cato, et al paid off bigtime.1
According to this article from CBS,
Bush Administration Adds $4 Trillion To National Debt.
At least it is 4 trillion. I think the discrepancy between the 4 trillion and 5 trillion may be because during the Bush years, Social Security was taking in more than it was doling out, so that may have reduced the deficit for Bush by about a trillion. That won't be the case going forwards as baby boomers enter retirement.
What a liberal loser you are:-)
Reagan / Bush I nearly tripled the debt and Bush / Cheney doubled it....true fiscal conservatives....(kidding)
Here's an honest republican who worked for Reagan ;
Reagan may have resisted calls for tax increases, but he ultimately supported them.
In 1982 alone, he signed into law not one but two major tax increases. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year and the Highway Revenue Act raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion.
According to a recent Treasury Department study, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the gross domestic product, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. An increase of similar magnitude today would raise more than $100 billion per year.
In 1983, Reagan signed legislation raising the Social Security tax rate.(doubled it actually)
This is a tax increase that lives with us still, since it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. As a consequence, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year.
In 1984, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act.
This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of GDP. A similar-sized tax increase today would be about $44 billion.
The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 raised taxes yet again.
Even the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue-neutral, contained a net tax increase in its first 2 years.
And the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 raised taxes still more.
The year 1988 appears to be the only year of the Reagan presidency, other than the first, in which taxes were not raised legislatively. Of course, previous tax increases remained in effect. According to a table in the 1990 budget, the net effect of all these tax increases was to raise taxes by $164 billion in 1992, or 2.6 percent of GDP. This is equivalent to almost $300 billion in today's economy.
http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_bartlett/bartlett200310290853.asp
Want to drive a liberal crazy, compare the tax rates of the Reagan administration to the Carter administration.
Looking the tax tables from back then the big rate cuts were all at the top.