PDA

View Full Version : White House forecasts higher U.S. budget deficit



Parkbandit
05-11-2009, 10:35 AM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Monday pushed up its forecast for the U.S. budget deficit for this year by $89 billion, reflecting the recession, a raft of new unemployment claims and corporate bailouts.

A fresh estimate of the deficit showed it coming in at $1.84 trillion -- representing a massive 12.9 percent of gross domestic product -- in the current 2009 fiscal year that ends on September 30. A prior White House forecast released in February projected a deficit of $1.75 trillion, or 12.3 percent of GDP.

The report may add to the political challenges facing President Barack Obama as he seeks to push through a new healthcare plan and other big domestic initiatives.

A White House official said the gloomier deficit picture reflected weaker tax receipts as the economy declined and higher costs for social safety-net programs such as unemployment insurance. Spending on the government rescues for the financial and automobile industries was also a factor in the higher deficit, said the official, who spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity.

While the Democratic-led Congress has given its approval to the broad outline of Obama's proposed budget for the 2010 fiscal year that includes initiatives on healthcare, education and other items, some moderate Democrats and a number of Republicans have expressed wariness about the deficit outlook.

Republicans contend that Obama's agenda would sharply increase the size of government and add to a mountain of debt but Democrat Obama counters that the enormous deficits are a legacy of President George W. Bush, a Republican.

The higher deficits "are driven in large part by the economic crisis inherited by this administration," White House budget director Peter Orszag wrote in his blog on Monday.

The report from the White House Office of Management and Budget also revised the deficit higher for the 2010 fiscal year, forecasting it at $1.26 trillion, or 8.5 percent of GDP, and up $87 billion from the $1.17 trillion projection given in February.

After taking office in January, Obama released a bare-bones version of his budget in February that offered a spending plan for 2010 carrying a price tag of $3.55 trillion. The White House revised up the size of the spending plan to $3.59 trillion.

The U.S. economy shrank at a surprisingly steep 6.1 percent rate in the first three months of this year.

CLOSING THE GAP

The new White House figures bring the deficit estimates closer in line with the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which has forecast a $1.85 trillion deficit this year and $1.38 trillion in fiscal 2010.

To allay worries about the deficit and fend off Republican attempts to paint him as a big spender, Obama over the past week has rolled out a series of announcements aimed at showing he is working to stem the red ink.

Last week, Obama said he could wring $17 billion in savings from his budget by cutting waste in areas from weapons systems and education to the cleanup of abandoned mines.

But the cuts in 121 programs amounted to less than one-half of 1 percent of the total budget for 2010 and even the slim list of reductions is likely to face resistance in Congress.

Obama also unveiled new details of his plan to toughen tax policies for multinational companies that invest abroad and to close loopholes on overseas tax shelters. Many businesses strongly oppose the proposed changes for multinational firms.

Later on Monday, Obama will preside over a White House forum aimed at highlighting budget savings that could be reaped by making the healthcare system more efficient.

Trade groups such as the American Medical Association and the American Hospital Association as well as labor unions are expected to present Obama with a letter pledging to reduce the growth of health spending by 1.5 percentage points annually.

The cost savings would be achieved through steps such as streamlining paperwork and changing the way hospitals deliver and bill for services to patients.

But the healthcare event appears likely to gloss over the political battle looming over Obama's push to establish a new public health insurance plan to help cover the estimated 46 million uninsured Americans.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/White-House-forecasts-higher-rb-15199206.html?.v=3

So.. the White House had to up the estimated deficit this year by 89 BILLION dollars.. but to compensate for it, he's claiming saving 17 BILLION?

I watched a documentary about Joseph Stalin this weekend.. and before you freak out and post "OMG HE R COMPARING OBAMA 2 STALIN!!".. I'm not. I did walk away from the show thinking that no matter what Obama does, people still blindly love this guy and will excuse pretty much anything he does... much like Stalin was beloved in Russia up until he died.

Stanley Burrell
05-11-2009, 10:38 AM
Stop comparing Stalin to Obama, pinko.

radamanthys
05-11-2009, 10:52 AM
...

...


...



Ah, well... The Iraq war cost less than Obama's first Earmark-out. Before you Obama Cultists get your knickers in a twist: That's not forgiving bush, that's condemning Obama. Bush was bad, so he can be bad, too? Hope and change, my ass.

When you're so massively in debt, you should be in a budget surplus. You should be using that surplus to pay off that debt. 17 billion dollars? Fucker's helicopters cost less than that. That's like, what, 10 of the new joint strike force planes?

You know, I kinda hope that Swine Flu mutates. It'll kill the poor first. Those that pay nothing and use 99% of the resources. I wonder if there's a genetic mutation that would allow a pandemic to wipe out a good chunk of the proletariat and spare the bourgeoisie? I'd put a couple bucks into that kinda research. Decrease the surplus population, and all. It would be grand.

Parkbandit
05-11-2009, 10:56 AM
...

...


...



Ah, well... The Iraq war cost less than Obama's first Earmark-out. Before you Obama Cultists get your knickers in a twist: That's not forgiving bush, that's condemning Obama. Bush was bad, so he can be bad, too? Hope and change, my ass.

When you're so massively in debt, you should be in a budget surplus. You should be using that surplus to pay off that debt. 17 billion dollars? Fucker's helicopters cost less than that. That's like, what, 10 of the new joint strike force planes?

You know, I kinda hope that Swine Flu mutates. It'll kill the poor first. Those that pay nothing and use 99% of the resources. I wonder if there's a genetic mutation that would allow a pandemic to wipe out a good chunk of the proletariat and spare the bourgeoisie? I'd put a couple bucks into that kinda research. Decrease the surplus population, and all. It would be grand.


WTF? You hope the Swine Flu mutates so it kills poor people?

There is something wrong with a person who hopes ill will on someone due to their economic condition.

Ignot
05-11-2009, 10:59 AM
You know, I kinda hope that Swine Flu mutates. It'll kill the poor first. Those that pay nothing and use 99% of the resources. I wonder if there's a genetic mutation that would allow a pandemic to wipe out a good chunk of the proletariat and spare the bourgeoisie? I'd put a couple bucks into that kinda research. Decrease the surplus population, and all. It would be grand.

Yeah that's fucked up, if your joking then say so but if not then you suck ass as a person.

Latrinsorm
05-11-2009, 11:47 PM
Stalin is the only person in history whose mass murder is comparable to Hitler's. He was as beloved as King Steve: the only other option was torture, disappearance, gulag, death, etc. Your "I'm not saying he's Stalin, but" is about as sensical as Ben Stein's "hey, you know who else gave speeches in stadiums? Hitler" bullshit.

Parkbandit
05-11-2009, 11:58 PM
Stalin is the only person in history whose mass murder is comparable to Hitler's. He was as beloved as King Steve: the only other option was torture, disappearance, gulag, death, etc. Your "I'm not saying he's Stalin, but" is about as sensical as Ben Stein's "hey, you know who else gave speeches in stadiums? Hitler" bullshit.

You obviously missed my comparison in the final sentence.. or it was completely above your intellectual capacity to understand it.

I'm leaning towards the later.

Latrinsorm
05-12-2009, 12:40 AM
The word you're looking for is "latter", and your comparison of personality cults was exactly what I was addressing, thank you.

Apotheosis
05-12-2009, 01:09 AM
So.. the White House had to up the estimated deficit this year by 89 BILLION dollars.. but to compensate for it, he's claiming saving 17 BILLION?

I watched a documentary about Joseph Stalin this weekend.. and before you freak out and post "OMG HE R COMPARING OBAMA 2 STALIN!!".. I'm not. I did walk away from the show thinking that no matter what Obama does, people still blindly love this guy and will excuse pretty much anything he does... much like Stalin was beloved in Russia up until he died.

You are entirely unamerican. Just wait until we all get awesome, government regulated, free healthcare, then it will be alright.

Apotheosis
05-12-2009, 01:10 AM
Decrease the surplus population, and all. It would be grand.

You sir, quite literally, make the baby Jesus cry.

Apotheosis
05-12-2009, 01:16 AM
Stalin is the only person in history whose mass murder is comparable to Hitler's. He was as beloved as King Steve: the only other option was torture, disappearance, gulag, death, etc. Your "I'm not saying he's Stalin, but" is about as sensical as Ben Stein's "hey, you know who else gave speeches in stadiums? Hitler" bullshit.


Well, let's take away the Obama=Stalin=Hitler comparison's based on public appearance / propaganda surrounding his Administration and take a look at the actions they've taken. Outside of laying a foundation for political dictatorship in the USA by the Fed. Obama hasn't killed millions of Jews, yet. So trying to compare him to those dictators isn't fair. /sarcasm

Back
05-12-2009, 01:23 AM
Ah, well... The Iraq war cost less than Obama's first Earmark-out.

Bullshit.

Gan
05-12-2009, 07:47 AM
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/op-ed-comic-prez-fed-deficits1.jpg

Landrion
05-12-2009, 11:02 AM
I watched a documentary about Joseph Stalin this weekend.. and before you freak out and post "OMG HE R COMPARING OBAMA 2 STALIN!!".. I'm not. I did walk away from the show thinking that no matter what Obama does, people still blindly love this guy and will excuse pretty much anything he does... much like Stalin was beloved in Russia up until he died.

I think Id've gone with a Reagan "teflon president" analogy personally.

:-)

radamanthys
05-12-2009, 01:48 PM
Haha, I shoulda used italics.

radamanthys
05-12-2009, 01:54 PM
Bullshit.

Look it up.

Mabus
05-12-2009, 03:25 PM
Stalin is the only person in history whose mass murder is comparable to Hitler's.
How about Mao Tse-tung, Hideki Tojo, Leopold II (of Belgium), Ismail Enver and Pol Pot?

Mao alone makes Hitler and Stalin (combined) look like school girls.

radamanthys
05-12-2009, 03:49 PM
Idi Amin was a pretty bad dude, too.

Latrinsorm
05-12-2009, 05:48 PM
How about Mao Tse-tung, Hideki Tojo, Leopold II (of Belgium), Ismail Enver and Pol Pot?Most of the people who died because of Mao can be attributed to incompetence and Chiang Kai-Shek rather than ill will, and I'm not alone in not referring to death caused by incompetence as murder. Nobody else is even close, and I'm not totally sure why you would bring them up when the contrasts are so stark. There have been plenty of monstrous regimes, Stalin and Hitler stand alone.

Mabus
05-12-2009, 10:43 PM
Most of the people who died because of Mao can be attributed to incompetence and Chiang Kai-Shek rather than ill will, and I'm not alone in not referring to death caused by incompetence as murder.
Between 30-80 million people died as a direct result of party purges, power consolidation and a socialist agriculture/economic program (Great Leap Forward) that Mao started and would not end.

By comparison Stalin's forced famine (1932-33) caused around an estimated 7 million deaths.