In a report you won't here in the conservative media and probably not in the lame stream media -- the deficit fell by 16% in FY 2012 from FY2011, according to data released a couple days ago by the CBO. http://cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/2012_09_MBR.pdf Contrary to the predictions of many of our conservative friends who claimed the deficit would increase, the deficit fell from FY2011 ($1.297 trillion) this year to $1.090 trillion, a 16% drop. The monthly report does not segregate "on-budget" deficits (which exclude SS), but given the over $200 billion drop in the total deficit, it is highly likely that the on-budget deficit dropped as well, for the third year in a row, and every full fiscal year Obama has been in office. The only other modern president who can match that achievement is Bill Clinton. What even Bill Clinton cannot match is Obama's record on spending. In 2010, Obama became the first president in many decades to preside over a year in which spending actually decreased, from $3.517 trillion to $3.456 trillion. (It has been fun for me to see how many conservatives challeged that fact when I pointed it out, vehemently denying it was true, as the conservative media, intent on portraying Obama as a big spender, never pointed it out that I am aware of.) Spending increased slightly in 2011 to $3.599 trillion, but in 2012, it has happened again. Spending in 2012 dropped to $3.540 trillion. Thus, in the three full fiscal years Obama has been president, spending has increased a total of 0.65%, or about 0.2% per year on average. No other modern president comes close to that low of a figure. While I am sure you will hear Hannity and Rush and Glenn and the boys repeat their line about what big spender Obama is, I'm betting that you won't hear them mention what I've just shared with you in this post. I'll even be surprised if the lame stream media picks it up. We will see.
What we need is to get to the point where the overall debt is shrinking as a percentage of GDP. At that point, GDP because a smaller burden on the economy. With a GDP of about $15.6 trillion, given 5% actual growth, we need deficits that are below about $780 billion a year. If we continue on this path of reducing the deficit by 16% per year, we will get below that point within two years, at which time the debt starts shrinking as a percentage of GDP. Unless we do something stupid like elect someone who is going to cut tax and increase military spending and run up bigger deficits again, like what happened in 1981 and 2001.
Just out of curiosity, I ran a search for "deficit" in a google news search. I figured there must be some stories about the deficit declining by 16%, right? That seems like it would be newsworthy to me, given all the sqawking we've heard about the deficits and debt. I perused through the first several pages and found a whopping two stories. One was this one: By Jack Nutter WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) The last fiscal year of the federal government is over. The results for the year were not good, not even fair. The government had a deficit of more than $1.1 trillion, accumulated at the rate of more than $3.5 billion a day. In addition, the overall national economy is anemic, unemployment and underemployment are at high rates. Many Americans are financially struggling just like the government, although in the case of the latter it just borrows more to pay its bills. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bu...t-of-no-return-2012-10-08?link=MW_latest_news Nutter doesn't even mention the fact that the deficit is $200+ billion lower than it was last year. From his article you'd think the deficit drastically increased. And then there was this one: CBO tallies 2012 deficit at $1.1 trillion A new estimate puts the deficit for the just-completed 2012 budget year at $1.1 trillion, the fourth straight year of trillion dollar deficits on President Barack Obamas watch. The result was a slight, $207 billion improvement from the 2011 deficit of $1.3 trillion. http://www.jamestownsun.com/event/article/id/170938/group/News/ Well, kudos to the "Jamestown Sun" for at least acknowledging that it decreased! But only after pointing out this was the 4th year it was over a trillion, and and deemed the $207 billion decrease as "slight". "Slight"? Huh? This was the biggest drop in the deficit of all time! It was almost double the previous best record recorded under Bill Clinton in 2000, which was a $111 billion drop. Slight? Where the heck is the media on this? If the deficit had gone *up* $200 billion you could be sure they'd be jumping all over it. Instead, hardly a peep, just two cranky articles. Liberal media? Bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Lame stream media.
Thanks Iriemon! I never would have heard of this! You're right. The news isn't reporting this for some reason! I made sure to post it on my facebook to spread the word. This just flies in the face on conservative logic. But I'm sure they'll explain it away by pointing to the republican congress. Even though the bulk of the deficit drop seems to come from a decrease in unemployment. And republicans have done nothing in that area.
I did find a few more stories on it from last week. But mostly it is being reported as the fourth year in a row with deficits over 4 trillion, as if it hasn't improved. A $207 billion decrease is a *major* improvement. And nothing on the spending decrease. The last president who saw spending actually decrease in two years was Dwight Eisenhower.
No mention of this from our conservative friends. With all the yammering we've heard from them about the deficits, you'd think they'd have some comment that the deficits dropped by 16%, a record $207 billion, and spending actually decreased for the second time in three years.
You already know what the response is going to be. Somewhere between "Stop blaming Bush" and "They cooked the books"
