Obama Releases $3.4 Trillion Budget Plan

[Goobieman]

Obama Releases $3.4 Trillion Budget Plan

The Obama administration today unveiled details of a $3.4 trillion federal budget for the fiscal year beginning in October, a proposal that includes substantial increases for a number of domestic priorities as well as a plan to trim or eliminate 121 programs at a savings of $17 billion.

In a statement delivered at the White House after the budget details were released, President Obama defended the cuts from critics on both sides -- those he said would fight to preserve the targeted programs and others who consider the reductions insignificant.

"We can no longer afford to spend as if deficits don't matter and waste is not our problem," he said. "We can no longer afford to leave the hard choices for the next budget, the next administration -- or the next generation."

Obama Releases $3.4 Trillion Budget Plan

He said this with a straight face?

The projected $1.7T deficit in this budget is 85% of the total spending in GWB's first budget, and 70% of the TOTAL deficits under GWB.

 

[American]

Obama Releases $3.4 Trillion Budget Plan

He said this with a straight face?

The projected $1.7T deficit in this budget is 85% of the total spending in GWB's first budget, and 70% of the TOTAL deficits under GWB.

Didn't the Dems say that Bush created the worse economy is human history?

 

[Truth Detector]

Obama Releases $3.4 Trillion Budget Plan

He said this with a straight face?

The projected $1.7T deficit in this budget is 85% of the total spending in GWB's first budget, and 70% of the TOTAL deficits under GWB.

NOT to worry Goobie, he announced today that his staff has already found $10 million in savings!!!!! In addition, he is RE-INTRODUCING pay-as-you-go to the legislature. :rofl

I have to laugh typing this stuff; he did all this with a straight face as well.

Oh and it gets even better; he claims that they will CUT this $1.7 trillion deficit in HALF by the end of his first term! :rofl

I guess they will save all this money by ensuring that ALL government vehicles tires are properly inflated.

You just cannot fabricate the level of stupidity that has infested our Federal leadership these days.

 

[Goobieman]

NOT to worry Goobie, he announced today that his staff has already found $10 million in savings!!!!! In addition, he is RE-INTRODUCING pay-as-you-go to the legislature. :rofl

The story I posted said $17B, with the claims that $17B is NOTHING countered by the note that "I don’t know about you, but where I come from, $17B is a lot of money."

This is priceless.

$17B isnt a reduction in spending, its a rouding error.

 

[American]

I thought Obama was bringing change. I don't call following in the footsteps of Bush spending, change. In fact Obama is far worse.

 

[Truth Detector]

The story I posted said $17B, with the claims that $17B is NOTHING countered by the note that "I don’t know about you, but where I come from, $17B is a lot of money."

This is priceless.

$17B isnt a reduction in spending, its a rouding error.

My bad, on TV he was speaking of an additional $10 BILLION not million; still laughable.

So let's do some math; $17 billion divided by $1.7 trillion equals savings of ONE percent. Change we can believe in.

But alas, in his announcement of closing programs, he also announced new ones that make more sense; end result, NO savings and still millions of lost jobs and $1.8 trillion in deficits.

The bottom line for this new change and transparency are the transparent efforts being made to avoid an HONEST debate regarding the amount of taxes that will have to be INCREASED to pay for this spending.

Obama continues to avoid this REALITY and postpone it until someone finally slaps him back to reality with how much $1.8 trillion actually is.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

It should be noted that while the Bush administration did not allocate funding within their budgets for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has (although I haven't reviewed this budget so I am not sure how much they have allocated).

EDIT: I just checked the budget and the Department of Defense has been allocated $533.7 billion, which is like 1/6 of the total budget.

 

[Goobieman]

I thought Obama was bringing change. I don't call following in the footsteps of Bush spending, change. In fact Obama is far worse.

Re: footsteps
If Bush was walking, then The Obama is running.

 

[Cold Highway]

So how many generations are screwed now? Mine has been for awhile so Im going to guess that my kids, my grandkids and great grandkids.

 

[Triad]

I have a pretty good feeling this spending coupled with the massive debt he is creating will be the primary cause of his downfall.

His spending is ridiculous and will likely be used by politicians on both sides as an example of what they won't be doing. Or as something to compare their opponents spending to.

 

[Goobieman]

It should be noted that while the Bush administration did not allocate funding within their budgets for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has (although I haven't reviewed this budget so I am not sure how much they have allocated)

EDIT: I just checked the budget and the Department of Defense has been allocated $533.7 billion.

Yes... and how much of that is for the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan?

It should be noted that The DOD budget in FY2009 was $515.4B, so I'd have to wager that the answer to my question is "not a whole lot, if any".

And, looking at the bigger picture --- so what?

 

[Khayembii Communique]

Yes... and how much of that is for the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan?

It should be noted that The DOD budget in FY2009 was $515.4B, so I'd have to wager that the answer to my question is "not a whole lot, if any".

And, looking at the bigger picture --- so what?

Yes, the DoD budget has only increased 4%, but I think it's significant that 1/6th of the entire 2010 fiscal year budget is spent on the DoD, when most are attacking him for spending so much on other things. I suppose I should have noted that in my last post.

 

[Redress]

I thought Obama was bringing change. I don't call following in the footsteps of Bush spending, change. In fact Obama is far worse.

Let's not jump the gun now. The potential for worse is definitely there, but give the guy some time to actually, you know, get past the crisis and see if he then has the ability to fix spending. Comparing the spending/deficit of Presidents Bush and Obama, when they are operating in two different sets of circumstances, will lead to errors of assumption.

Note: I am not saying I agree with President Obama on spending, only that it is too early to see the end results of that spending, and that the comparison to President Bush is inaccurate due to the differing circumstances. I am highly concerned about the level of spending, and limited cuts, but we are 3 months into his 4 year term, he could fix his mistakes, maybe.

 

[danarhea]

Damn, I thought I had seen it all under Bush. I guess I hadn't. This dwarfs Bush's spending. Damn Democrats. They believe they have to beat the Republicans in every area. What the hell kind of a twisted contest is that? LOL.

 

[Truth Detector]

It should be noted that while the Bush administration did not allocate funding within their budgets for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has (although I haven't reviewed this budget so I am not sure how much they have allocated).

EDIT: I just checked the budget and the Department of Defense has been allocated $533.7 billion, which is like 1/6 of the total budget.

And this means what?

 

[Truth Detector]

I have a pretty good feeling this spending coupled with the massive debt he is creating will be the primary cause of his downfall.

His spending is ridiculous and will likely be used by politicians on both sides as an example of what they won't be doing. Or as something to compare their opponents spending to.

But it is not the "spending" that is the outrage, it is the deliberate effort to avoid a debate on WHO will be paying for this largess.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

And this means what?

From my last post in this thread:

Yes, the DoD budget has only increased 4%, but I think it's significant that 1/6th of the entire 2010 fiscal year budget is spent on the DoD, when most are attacking him for spending so much on other things. I suppose I should have noted that in my last post.

 

[Truth Detector]

Yes, the DoD budget has only increased 4%, but I think it's significant that 1/6th of the entire 2010 fiscal year budget is spent on the DoD, when most are attacking him for spending so much on other things. I suppose I should have noted that in my last post.

It is hardly significant when the nation’s defense is one of the primary purposes of the Federal Government.

The REAL outrage is the same percent and perhaps even higher now, is spent paying INTEREST on the National DEBT for all the SOCIAL welfare programs implemented by decades of Democrat congresses which have done NOTHING to reduce poverty in this nation but instead creates a permanent dependent class of citizen that supports Democrats.

 

[Truth Detector]

Comparing the spending/deficit of Presidents Bush and Obama, when they are operating in two different sets of circumstances, will lead to errors of assumption.

You are correct; Bush spent us into a $200 billion deficit dealing with 9-11, fighting two wars and the devastation of a Democrat run city that was ill prepared.

Obama just throws the money at Liberal programs intended to increase the span and control of Government without even a debate as to how to pay for it all.

Let's not also forget that while Bush was in office, Liberals chastised him for spending away the surplus for daring to allow/permit the citizens of this nation to keep MORE of their own money.

While spending this nation into a $1.8 trillion hole, not one Liberal chastised him for a tax giveaway.

Hypocrisy is the rule of the day when it comes to Democrats. :roll:

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

It is hardly significant when the nation’s defense is one of the primary purposes of the Federal Government.

The REAL outrage is the same percent and perhaps even higher now, is spent paying INTEREST on the National DEBT for all the SOCIAL welfare programs implemented by decades of Democrat congresses which have done NOTHING to reduce poverty in this nation but instead creates a permanent dependent class of citizen that supports Democrats.

I think Khayembii is just giving everyone an FYI.
Its important to realize that the war spending is included with this budget.

Don't dump on him, he's being reasonable.

 

[Analyst]

While I agree the spending is beyond absurd, the following article does provide some reinforcement of his claims of cutting spending dramatically by the end of his term. I'll believe it when I see it, but it's better than nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/us/politics/08budget.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=ig

 

[Goobieman]

Yes, the DoD budget has only increased 4%....

You remarked that it was signifucant that The Obama had (supposedly) budgeted fuds for Iraq/Afghanistan. If true, HOW is that significant? HOW is that relevant?

but I think it's significant that 1/6th of the entire 2010 fiscal year budget is spent on the DoD,

That's down from 1/5th -- but, given that the reduction of % of total spending is due to a huge increase in total spending, how is that significant?

And again -- so what? How does any of that mitigate the huge spending/deficits of The Obama's budget?

 

[Truth Detector]

From my last post in this thread:

My comment was specifically this reference:

It should be noted that while the Bush administration did not allocate funding within their budgets for the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the Obama administration has (although I haven't reviewed this budget so I am not sure how much they have allocated).

I would ask again, what does this debate have to do with George Bush or how they accounted for the war spending? Bush isn’t in charge anymore and had nothing to do with the formulation of the current budget and its corresponding trillions in deficits so why bring the name or what occurred up in every thread started about Obama?

We are talking about the CURRENT administration, the historically unprecedented spending us into a $1.8 trillion dollar deficit and the reality that we are still waiting for an HONEST debate as to how they are going to pay for it.

The laughable denial so far is that Obama found $17 billion in savings; how is this even remotely going to pay for the deficit.

The REAL story here is that this is a deliberate attempt to AVOID any HONEST discussion about how they are going to have to SIGNIFICANTLY increase taxes ACROSS the board for purely political purposes by waiting until AFTER the 2010 mid term elections.

The reason for this is as obvious as the noses on our faces; because an HONEST assessment of the cost will not only INFURIATE the American people and cause political disaster for the cretins who infest Washington, but also will drag the economy further down the drain.

Transparency? What a freaking laugh! The only thing transparent with this President is the obvious transparency that exists between his BIG ears.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

That's down from 1/5th -- but, given that the reduction of % of total spending is due to a huge increase in total spending, how is that significant?

And again -- so what? How does any of that mitigate the huge spending/deficits of The Obama's budget?

Its 1/6 the budget, thats a pretty good size.

That doesn't mean we should excuse how much is being spent.

It means that Obama is including defense spending in his budget.
G.W. did not do that.

 

[Truth Detector]

While I agree the spending is beyond absurd, the following article does provide some reinforcement of his claims of cutting spending dramatically by the end of his term. I'll believe it when I see it, but it's better than nothing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/us/politics/08budget.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&src=ig

:rofl From the same article from the New York Times which helped drag this Community Organizer across the finish line to become President:

While the $17 billion in projected savings represents a small portion of the proposed budget, Mr. Obama insisted that “that’s a lot of money, even by Washington standards.” It was enough to pay for a $2,500 tuition tax credit for millions of students, for larger Pell education grants, he said, “with enough money left over to pay for everything we do to protect the National Parks.”

“For every dollar we seek to save there will be those who have an interest in seeing it spent,” the president said. “That’s how unnecessary programs survive year after year. That’s how budgets swell.”

But, he added, “We cannot accept business as usual.”

You cannot be THIS President and make THESE assertions and not laugh your ass off. :rofl