Posted on 07/29/2011 5:07:28 PM PDT by Kaslin
President Obama does not care much about deficits — other than worrying that big debt might matter in his re-election campaign.
In his first three budgets, Obama borrowed nearly $5 trillion. Currently, the government is borrowing about 45% of everything it spends. Obama's projected 10-year plan would add nearly $10 trillion to existing U.S. debt.
This spring he proposed the largest annual deficit in U.S. peacetime history, which is why his $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 was rejected in the Senate by a 97-0 vote.
In other words, under Obama, the government during the last three years has borrowed on average about $4 billion each day. That staggering sum is far in excess of the $1.6 billion per day during the eight-year tenure of George W. Bush, who until Obama's presidency had borrowed more than any peacetime president.
Apparently in Obama's worldview there are advantages to deficits that explain his fondness for unprecedented borrowing. In Keynesian terms, massive government red ink is supposed to foster economic prosperity by creating goods and services that a purportedly less-efficient private sector cannot.
The administration certainly has added an additional 100,000 federal jobs and expanded food stamps to nearly 50 million recipients — and in the process enlarged the pool of potentially grateful constituents. This belief in the superior wisdom of the state explains why almost all the Cabinet secretaries in the Obama administration came out of state or federal government, not from private enterprise.
Massive deficits not only empower more federal hiring and entitlements, but at some point lead to higher taxes. This gorge-the-beast notion is the flip-side of the Reagan-era idea of "starving the beast" of big government by cutting federal revenue through reduced tax rates.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
who gives a rats a&& if HE recovers, can the country?
I really could not care wther or not O can survive. The major question is how will the country survive. BTW 100,000 federal workers, as bad as that is is $100,000 x 100,000= $10 B in extra spending for their salaries. Out of $1T deficit, that is nothing. It is not their direct salary cost. It is what they do, and what they do is tie down tens and hundres of hard working citizens for each of them and keep them from being productive, not that an economy built on banking administration and legal administration and health care administration is doing much that is productive.
great minds...
ditto.
In his first three budgets, Obama borrowed nearly $5 trillion. Currently, the government is borrowing about 45% of everything it spends. Obama’s projected 10-year plan would add nearly $10 trillion to existing U.S. debt.
This spring he proposed the largest annual deficit in U.S. peacetime history, which is why his $3.7 trillion budget for 2012 was rejected in the Senate by a 97-0 vote.
///
Obama has been overspending Bush, by 1 trillion a year.
if he ran the same (high) deficits as Bush,
there would STILL be 2 TRILLION left on the debt ceiling.
...but, why worry? Boehner will cosign to raise it another 2.4 trillion, so Obama can keep ALL his base happy.
like these, when 9 million Americans are unemployed because of the EPA, and regulations, and the much high minimum wage:
“The administration certainly has added an additional 100,000 federal jobs “
Quit calling it Keynesian. It’s Kenyasian.
Excellent point and the answer is No
$5 Trillion. That is breathtaking spending in 2 1/2 years.
That is spending $5.5 Billion EACH DAY, that you do not have. Stunning.
The question is irrelevant; Hussein is a dyed in the wool socialist who believes that all assets are the property of The State.
His idea of ‘budget management’ is to raise taxes on those with assets and redistribute the wealth to the non-productive.
That has long since been proven a failure everywhere it’s been tried.
Even Russia and China - the world’s two enormous experiments in communism - have given up.
Yet, our delusional Thief in Chief forges ahead, bringing the once great U.S. to the brink of bankruptcy.
There isn’t enough gold in Fort Knox to satisfy his lust for the property of others.
His only remaining cheerleaders are those with a hand out to receive his stolen largesse, and when the well runs dry, as it is currently doing, the only ones left in his corner will be the racists who favor anyone with a Black skin.
We are witnessing the Africanization of America.
My 29 year old son still thinks it is Bush’s fault.
But he is not all bad. He does think that all politicians are crooks, no matter what party.
Doesn't look like he has to... 22 Congress Critters is not nearly enough... Sad. Nov 2012 can't come soon enough! lol
Can President Recover From Deficit Binge?
Hopefully not, looking for a massive coronaryand then I’ll throw a keg party.
It won’t hurt him at all. Democratic voters, as well as a large number of others, have no idea about the size of the deficit, the size of the budget, the size of the debt, and the size of the economy. They have no idea about the amount of taxes that could be collected from the “rich” to finance Obama’s runaway spending and hold to an idea that if the rich just paid their “fair share” they could enjoy milk and honey forever. It has also been consistently shown that the majority of voters have no idea where federal funds actually go and are deluded about the relative size of programs. There’s a disconnect between the spending and voters with much of it because half the country has no income tax liability. Many have a negative income tax liability. We are a welfare state with open borders and birthright citizenship. As Friedman noted, you can’t have a welfare state with open borders because it’s financially crippling. Our immigration policies favor low skilled family members of residents from third world countries over highly skilled workers from the developed world. As a result, immigrants are a net financial drain, regardless of how Democrats try to gloss over the fact.
The debt will never be paid down either but instead recycled as bonds come due and inflated away over time. The sheer size of the debt means that we would have to have large surpluses for decades to put an actual dent in the debt stock when we have no recent history of having balanced budgets.
I think just the opposite is occurring. obama is irrelevant in the current debate. It is a battle between Speaker Bhoener and Senator Reid. We may end up with a Balanced Budget Amendment going to the states. The driving force is conservatism.
Our problem is too few people get their news through conservative media so it takes a long time for people to realize the Rats have got to go. I talk with contractors all day long many of whom thought obama would be good. They don't say it anymore and a lot of them agree when I say "if you want more work, obama has got to go".
Ah, an optimist!
Yes sir!
We will win because unlike Europe we don't have a big brother to protect us. The tax burden for a socialist state that has to protect itself is so great it collapses. The USSR is a great example of this. China is thriving because they are becoming capitalist.
The Pres**ent doesn’t want to recover from the deficit binge.
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.