« | »

Deficit Balloons, Dems Still Won’t Cut

From the Wall Street Journal:

Deficit Outlook Darkens

Stark Warning for 2011 Fuels Battle Over Government Spending and Taxation

January 26, 2011

WASHINGTON—The federal budget deficit will reach a record of nearly $1.5 trillion in 2011 due to the weak economy, higher spending and fresh tax cuts, congressional budget analysts said, in a stark warning that will drive the growing battle over government spending and taxation.

At that size, the deficit—up from $1.29 trillion in 2010—would be roughly $60 billion more than the White House projected last summer, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday. Last year’s tax-cut package alone will add roughly $400 billion to the deficit, the CBO said.

And we are supposed to believe them. By the way, would it be cynical to ask how these non-partisan "budget analysts" are coming up with these projections when we don’t even have a budget?

As a percentage of the nation’s economic output, the 9.8% deficit would be the second-largest since World War II, behind only the 10% level in 2009.

In other words Obama’s first year in office broke the modern record for budget deficits. And yet we never heard anything about it. Instead, Congress turned around and passed the biggest and most expensive entitlement in the history of the country.

The grim outlook landed a day after President Barack Obama outlined plans to push for new spending that he said would help keep the U.S. globally competitive in his State of the Union speech, and the data could complicate that effort. Republicans have dismissed the president’s plans as ignoring the more pressing need to reduce the deficit…

Why is the media pretending any of this is news? We heard all of these figures during the debate over extending the Bush tax cuts.

Democrats argued that the bleak outlook for unemployment justified spending in a still-fragile economy, a line they intend to use to resist the GOP push for cuts.

After all, we have seen what record spending did for unemployment in 2009.

When asked whether current spending levels should be maintained, Sen. Patty Murray (D., Wash.), a member of the Senate Democratic leadership team, said: "We can’t have a fire sale." …

Any mention of spending cuts and the Democrats start screaming ‘fire!’

The CBO report offered a sobering look at both the short-term and long-term fiscal outlook. It projected the unemployment rate would fall from 9.4% now to 9.2% by the end of this year and then to 8.2% by the end of 2012. It projected the unemployment rate wouldn’t fall to typical pre-recession levels—about 5.5%—until 2016.

Holy moley.

Meanwhile, the U.S. debt is expected to increase rapidly in the coming years, compounded by rising health-care costs, the aging baby boomer generation and soaring interest payments. By 2017, the level of U.S. debt subject to the debt ceiling will hit $20.9 trillion, the CBO projected.

And that is probably a lowball figure.

Democrats and Republicans are clamoring to introduce proposals to cut spending.

Which Democrats would those be? Let’s see their names. — Or is it the usual suspects who will use any opportunity to gut our national defense?

Twenty Senate Republicans introduced a constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget. Meanwhile, 13 senators introduced a bill that would prevent lawmakers from receiving an automatic pay raise each year.

Several top Democrats on Wednesday said the CBO report was troubling, but warned Republicans against using the data to slash spending in the short-term.

"I don’t think that’s the way to solve the problem," Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) said. He called for a fundamental overhaul of tax and spending rules that would address the long-term fiscal problems.

And by that Mr. Conrad means we need to increases taxes and spending. Which just happens to be the Democrats solution to everything – and most importantly, their re-election.

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, January 27th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

7 Responses to “Deficit Balloons, Dems Still Won’t Cut”

  1. P. Aaron says:

    Those who damn money are always the ones that get angry when manipulating the money exposes their dishonest monetary policies & actions.

  2. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Of course, what’s amazing is anyone with half a wit will ask, “how did the deficit get so big?” and of course, the answer is, massive government give-aways to unions and political friends (disguised as “stimulus”) and also that new healthcare thingy.

    The deceitful liar in the white house lies, then lies some more to further obscure the first lie, then has to keep telling the lie hoping that someone will believe it. Sadly, some do and they write the news stories.


  3. Reality Bytes says:

    At least Pelosi is back to taking her broom home. We save millions just with her gone from 3rd in line to the presidency (Oh! I just gave myself a chill. Can you imagine?!).

    As Brando would say, “The horror…the horror….the horror”

  4. untrainable says:

    No matter how many times they use the phrase “Tax Cuts” when talking about not raising taxes, it’s not going to make us believe that there were tax cuts. I’ll tell you very simply what causes deficits. Spending more money than you have. That’s it. It’s not hard to understand. So, again very simply, if you want to cut the deficit… stop spending money that we don’t have.

    Here’s one suggestion I haven’t heard anyone make, as far as spending cuts. How about cutting foreign aid in half. Maybe down to 1/4. How about we stop giving away money to other countries altogether until our bank accounts are back in the black. With all our money staying at home, we can finally address all those human rights violations that the Chinese want us to take care of.

    • proreason says:

      Here’s the strategy of the marxists. Even many conservatives have bought into it.

      This is the marxist myth: “The deficit cannot be reduced unless SS and Medicare are cut.”

      The marxist Democrats will NEVER suggest entitlement reform. Their objective isn’t financial responsibility anyway. They want total power. Instead, they slink in the center of the web, waiting to pounce on Republicans once they date to suggest “the impossible”. Once the Republics touch the web, the trap is sprung, and demagoguing will begin that makes Tucson look like a comedy club.

      That’s why I like Rand Paul’s suggestions so much. Cut EVERYTHING else to the bone.

      In other words, eliminate government except for the military, SS and Medicare. Absolutely f*kg eliminate it

    • tranquil.night says:

      “Instead, they slink in the center of the web, waiting to pounce on Republicans once they dare to suggest ‘the impossible.'”

      Yep, spin the web of lies, eat the unsuspecting Republican flies.

      Regarding Rand Paul’s plan, there’s a classic line from Batman: The Dark Knight that I’ve been dying to quote for whenever we got serious about taking down the Demoncraps taxpayer funded base, in toto:

      “Detective Jim Gordon: We’re going after the mob’s life-savings. Things will get ugly.”

    • Liberals Demise says:

      If only someone with a “FULL” set would emerge from
      the shadows and be “America’s” Hero!

      Flash? Are you out there?

« Front Page | To Top
« | »