Federal Deficit Highest Since 1940s

Federal Deficit Highest Since 1940s - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

The federal deficit is higher than it has been since the 1940s, in the years immediately after World War II.

A new visual from the "Face the Facts USA," a non-partisan election project from George Washington University, shows the federal deficit has risen significantly under President Barack Obama, and that the government is increasingly spending money it doesn't have.

In every second of 2011, for example, the government spent $114,253—even though it was only taking in $73,043 in revenue. According to Face the Facts, that means the federal government spent $41,210 every second that it didn't actually have.

The deficit this year, however, looks as if it will be lower than it was the day President Obama assumed office.

Using data from the Office of Management and Budget, the visual also points out that the only time in recent history the deficit has approached this level was during the 1980s recession.

Click to expand...

We need to stop the spending.

American said:

We need to stop the spending.

Click to expand...

There are much better solutions than that.

American said:

Federal Deficit Highest Since 1940s - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)





We need to stop the spending.

Click to expand...

All of it!?

We are so screwing over our children.

American said:

We need to stop the spending.

Click to expand...

my preference is that once the economy is recovering, we cut spending in some areas and increase tax rates.

Time to invade Germany.

In every second of 2011, for example, the government spent $114,253—even though it was only taking in $73,043 in revenue. According to Face the Facts, that means the federal government spent $41,210 every second that it didn't actually have.

Click to expand...

So what???

What purpose does this serve? We all know the deficit is high right now.

A lot of things contribute to this, including defense spending, Bush tax cuts, and the "entitlement" or welfare programs. Conservatives have been succeeding in making the deficit problem and the spending problem identical in the public consciousness. There are many ways to go about cutting the deficit and all of them have serious downsides.

It really is a remarkable propaganda campaign the conservatives have kept up the last few years. They don't only act as though revenue approaches to fixing the deficit are ineffective, but as if they are illegitimate or cheap. They have made it a blaspheme to talk about things like revenues or defense spending.

E-M said:

What purpose does this serve? We all know the deficit is high right now.

A lot of things contribute to this, including defense spending, Bush tax cuts, and the "entitlement" or welfare programs. Conservatives have been succeeding in making the deficit problem and the spending problem identical in the public consciousness. There are many ways to go about cutting the deficit and all of them have serious downsides.

It really is a remarkable propaganda campaign the conservatives have kept up the last few years. They don't only act as though revenue approaches to fixing the deficit are ineffective, but as if they are illegitimate or cheap. They have made it a blaspheme to talk about things like revenues or defense spending.

Click to expand...

I'm a conservative and I want defense spending cut in half. What else you wanna cut? Oh, and I'm not talking about the cuts to projected increases (Orwellian cuts), I'm talking actual cuts.

increasing revenues, stopping waste and abuse, and increasing the number of tax payers is the better way to go. No need to cut any programs if we did that things.

Alright, I have a question. How exactly is our deficit bad? We owe a whole bunch of money to various people, including China, that we don't plan to pay back. And then we keep borrowing money from them with impunity. It seems to me that our massive deficit is a sign of international supremacy. We say we want money, and people "loan" it to us, knowing that they'll never see most of it again. Doesn't that make us kind of like the mafia of international economics?

Paschendale said:

and people "loan" it to us, knowing that they'll never see most of it again

Click to expand...

Bondholders are paid so this is wrong.

E-M said:

What purpose does this serve? We all know the deficit is high right now.

A lot of things contribute to this, including defense spending, Bush tax cuts, and the "entitlement" or welfare programs. Conservatives have been succeeding in making the deficit problem and the spending problem identical in the public consciousness. There are many ways to go about cutting the deficit and all of them have serious downsides.

It really is a remarkable propaganda campaign the conservatives have kept up the last few years. They don't only act as though revenue approaches to fixing the deficit are ineffective, but as if they are illegitimate or cheap. They have made it a blaspheme to talk about things like revenues or defense spending.

Click to expand...

There is one way to drastically reduce the deficit that won't cause any burden at all. Eliminate the massive fraud waste and abusive of government projects. It happens to a staggering degree on every level. I will give you one good example...

I am a NYS employee. A large government owned building recently got a 500,000 upgrade to its entrance. Now when they said entrance, I was thinking they meant the whole damn thing. The drive in, parking the sidewalks, and the entrance to the building itself.

Now being that NYS has a massive deficit problem, such a works project is simply not needed at this time. Being that as a union worker I have received several different types of cuts in pay in the last few years. So I was understandably pissed that while I am doing my part, the government itself is not doing theirs. Beyond that, I know some contractors, and asked a few questions... given what I told them they figured the job to be at most half of what the government was paying for it. But THEN I learned that when they meant entrance, they weren't kidding! 500,000 for a re-designed entrance and sidewalk to the entrance. That was it. ARE YOU F_ING KIDDING ME!! That job in the civilian world would cost at most 1/10th of what the government paid.

Now this type of massive overspend goes on all across the country by the fed, state and local governments. What if.... that was eliminated? What if.... the government paid what it should? Our deficits would instantly be cut, perhaps in half, perhaps even more.

"Eliminate fraud and waste" is a commonly thrown about phrase, but it is neither as simplistic as some would have you believe, nor is it as sizable as others proclaim. I understand the sentiment that lies behind such a statement, but the saying itself has been turned into a safety net of sorts for those with little other policy proposals or credentials to their name. Simply put, you could eliminate fraud (as if federal agencies are willingly defrauded at a frantic pace), and put an end to waste (note that the term is horribly subjective, depending on who you happen to be conversing with at the time), and still fail to make more than a mere dent in our current deficit.

Romulus said:

I'm a conservative and I want defense spending cut in half. What else you wanna cut? Oh, and I'm not talking about the cuts to projected increases (Orwellian cuts), I'm talking actual cuts.

Click to expand...

Such a move would prompt layoffs of considerable size, which aren't exactly optimal at this time from a militarily or economic standpoint.

00timh said:

There is one way to drastically reduce the deficit that won't cause any burden at all. Eliminate the massive fraud waste and abusive of government projects. It happens to a staggering degree on every level. I will give you one good example...

Click to expand...

While I agree that waste and redundancy should be eliminated, its just a drop in the bucket. First, addressing what "we" want from government. Its turned into a bloated monster that only drastic and "draconian" (love that word) cuts would actually make a difference. Funny part, most Americans wouldn't even notice most of the cuts.

Second and the lion's share of the problem...entitlements. SS, Medicare/aid and various other "safety net" entitlements make up over 50% of federal spending.

Fishstyx said:

While I agree that waste and redundancy should be eliminated, its just a drop in the bucket. First, addressing what "we" want from government. Its turned into a bloated monster that only drastic and "draconian" (love that word) cuts would actually make a difference. Funny part, most Americans wouldn't even notice most of the cuts.

Second and the lion's share of the problem...entitlements. SS, Medicare/aid and various other "safety net" entitlements make up over 50% of federal spending.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the entitlements do make up such a large portion of the spending. And they cost so much and yet give out crumbs. If they were simply run better, the cost to effectiveness ratio would be so much better. They wouldn't be so costly if there wasn't so much wasteful spending on them. And then of course any and every other agency, including the DOD. Fighters and bombers cost twice as much as they should... and every other weapon. The cost the government pays for everything is double if not more than what the average citizen pays. Reduce the spending of government in half just by taking the money it gets, and even with keeping all of its programs, agencies and other entitlements, just manage them better and suddenly our deficit problem is not so severe.

Romulus said:

I'm a conservative and I want defense spending cut in half. What else you wanna cut? Oh, and I'm not talking about the cuts to projected increases (Orwellian cuts), I'm talking actual cuts.

Click to expand...

I'm an anti-capitalist, so the question doesn't really apply to me. "Cuts" are only important to me insofar as they weaken the capitalist class and make wholesale revolution possible.

I wasn't trying to argue how to cut the deficit. I was observing how the discussion has developed in in the U.S. Prominent mainstream conservatives have succeeded in making defense cuts and revenue increases almost untouchable in the national discussion about the deficit. Obviously I wasn't arguing that every single conservative that exists ever opposes defense cuts. The only important conservatives I know who don't are the Paul's. Not surprisingly they are consistently alienated from the mainstream conservative establishment.

00timh said:

There is one way to drastically reduce the deficit that won't cause any burden at all. Eliminate the massive fraud waste and abusive of government projects. It happens to a staggering degree on every level. I will give you one good example...

I am a NYS employee. A large government owned building recently got a 500,000 upgrade to its entrance. Now when they said entrance, I was thinking they meant the whole damn thing. The drive in, parking the sidewalks, and the entrance to the building itself.

Now being that NYS has a massive deficit problem, such a works project is simply not needed at this time. Being that as a union worker I have received several different types of cuts in pay in the last few years. So I was understandably pissed that while I am doing my part, the government itself is not doing theirs. Beyond that, I know some contractors, and asked a few questions... given what I told them they figured the job to be at most half of what the government was paying for it. But THEN I learned that when they meant entrance, they weren't kidding! 500,000 for a re-designed entrance and sidewalk to the entrance. That was it. ARE YOU F_ING KIDDING ME!! That job in the civilian world would cost at most 1/10th of what the government paid.

Now this type of massive overspend goes on all across the country by the fed, state and local governments. What if.... that was eliminated? What if.... the government paid what it should? Our deficits would instantly be cut, perhaps in half, perhaps even more.

Click to expand...

Both parties have been arguing for this since the beginning of time. Both parties get into power and spend recklessly. Arguing to cut waste is the easiest thing to do politically and the hardest thing to execute. This is why Republicans could oppose Obama's bailouts and then attend the ribbon cutting ceremonies in their districts for projects funded by the bailout. I don't have any examples on hand of democrats doing something similar but I wouldn't be surprised if a conservative here did.

In any government where money is so important to being elected you are going to get waste. This is because those that gain from the waste will never forget the favor while most of the public will never remember. It really isn't in either parties interest to cut waste and alienate the special interests that fund their campaigns.

Romulus said:

I'm a conservative and I want defense spending cut in half. What else you wanna cut? Oh, and I'm not talking about the cuts to projected increases (Orwellian cuts), I'm talking actual cuts.

Click to expand...

That's the only cuts you want?

00timh said:

Yeah, the entitlements do make up such a large portion of the spending. And they cost so much and yet give out crumbs. If they were simply run better, the cost to effectiveness ratio would be so much better. They wouldn't be so costly if there wasn't so much wasteful spending on them. And then of course any and every other agency, including the DOD. Fighters and bombers cost twice as much as they should... and every other weapon. The cost the government pays for everything is double if not more than what the average citizen pays. Reduce the spending of government in half just by taking the money it gets, and even with keeping all of its programs, agencies and other entitlements, just manage them better and suddenly our deficit problem is not so severe.

Click to expand...

Any rational person realizes that these programs need reform. Problem is, anytime this is even mentioned, some politician comes out claiming people want to starve grandma and grandpa and then push them out on an ice flow. Look what happened to Paul Ryan. His proposals were reasonable or at the very least a good place to start the damn discussion.

Fishstyx said:

Any rational person realizes that these programs need reform. Problem is, anytime this is even mentioned, some politician comes out claiming people want to starve grandma and grandpa and then push them out on an ice flow. Look what happened to Paul Ryan. His proposals were reasonable or at the very least a good place to start the damn discussion.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately it's true of both sides. Ryan's budget is one example. Another is Obamacare, which includes a $500 billion reduction in Medicare provider payments. Republicans attacked that as an assault on Medicare ... while calling for the much steeper cuts in Ryan's budget. The only way we're going to do entitlement reform is if the two sides do it together. And what are the chances of that these days....?

muciti said:

increasing revenues, stopping waste and abuse, and increasing the number of tax payers is the better way to go. No need to cut any programs if we did that things.

Click to expand...

I feel that requires a level of political responsibility that we don't have in this country.

I really am starting to think conservatives don't realize just what ideas like "stop spending" will do to our economy. They want to follow the free market have Americans working for the same wages as Chinese people. They want to cut government in size by anywhere from 25% to 50% (laying off anywhere from 750,000 to 1,500,000 people in the process). They want to end SS. I mean, yeah, say we do all this? Then what? We put the majority of American workers to work for the 6-7$ slave wage a kid in Bangladesh is willing to take from Nike?

AdamT said:

Unfortunately it's true of both sides. Ryan's budget is one example. Another is Obamacare, which includes a $500 billion reduction in Medicare provider payments. Republicans attacked that as an assault on Medicare ... while calling for the much steeper cuts in Ryan's budget. The only way we're going to do entitlement reform is if the two sides do it together. And what are the chances of that these days....?

Click to expand...

Problem is that $500 billion wasn't a reduction...it was shift to other aspects of Obamacare. Shifting money to expand the progrma is hardly reform. Its making the problem worse.