Posted on 02/05/2013 11:07:51 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Government programs always cost more than projected; cost overruns on government contracts are the norm; the government always spends more year-over-year; economic projections invariably are rosier than ultimate reality . . . but the CBO says the deficit will narrow going forward. How quaint.
They are not correct because they are lied to and fed “rosy scenarios” all the time.
They are not correct here, either.
Example the F-22 was slated to cost around 177 Million per aircraft. The final cost is over 339 million per aircraft.
In other words its all bunk!
Hmmm, the cover letter to the CBO report begins, “Once upon a time . . .”
I checked the deficit figure for Oct, Nov and Dec. The total is $378B. Annualized, FY 13 deficit will be higher than FY12. Also in every article, the monthly deficit exceeded last years number and exceed expectations.....
I checked the deficit figure for Oct, Nov and Dec. The total is $378B. Annualized, FY 13 deficit will be higher than FY12. Also in every article, the monthly deficit exceeded last years number and exceed expectations.....
The numbers for 2013 might not be too far off. We might not be too far under 1.4% growth. For 2014 forward, it’s comedy night.
That guy was way more credible and entertaining than Jay Carney.
This must be what it was like to live in the Soviet Union and read Pravda and Izvestia.
$24 TRILLION is the BEST scenario. That's something to get EXCITED about?
As a result of those factors, revenues are projected to grow from 15.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 19.1 percent of GDP in 2015
So CBO assumes a 20.9% increase in revenues.
Was our recent tax increase 21%?
And will a 21% increase in tax rate necessarily translate to a 21% increase in tax revenue?
In addition, they assume a rise in income because of the growing economy when the economy contracted during Q4 2012.
Also from the CBO statement:
outlays are projected to decline from 22.8 percent of GDP in 2012 to 21.5 percent by 2017
Does anyone on FR really expect Federal outlays to decrease with Democrats and big gov't Republicans apparently in control of spending?
They might have been right. In January 2007, the deficit was around 165 billion, down from about 248 billion the previous year. Of course, something changed in January 2007, but I can't remember what that was.
Yes. Increasing spending, temporarily cut tax rates weighted to the lower income end. To this day lots of folks here refuse to admit it was folly.
After thorough assessment of the facts included in this article I’d have to conclude this is some serious and HEAVY BULL$HIT designed to be used to help keep the socialist show going.
The Democrats can argue we can afford higher taxes, we can afford single payer, we can afford more entitlements - and the deficit is shrinking!
In a center left country, its hard to beat Santa Claus.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.