View Full Version : The FACT is, we have a shrinking deficit.
Cigar
08-09-2013, 06:59 AM
http://m.static.newsvine.com/servista/imagesizer?file=steve-benen7F64B3ED-BFD5-85EE-6386-7324C46DCB99.jpg&width=380 House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News on Sunday, and when the discussion turned to a possible self-imposed budget crisis, the Virginia Republican said (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/05/19875985-cantor-confounded-on-compromise?lite) lawmakers should be "focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit." What Cantor said was the opposite (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/vp/52681573#52681573) of the truth -- he said the nation has a "growing deficit," when in reality, we have a shrinking deficit (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/07/12/19435529-as-deficit-shrinks-debt-ceiling-crisis-looms?lite). We can have a discussion about whether the House Majority Leader was deliberately trying to deceive the public -- Republicans have an incentive to convince the public that U.S. finances are in worse shape than they really are -- or whether Cantor simply doesn't know the basics of current events. But I'm afraid it's either one or the other. Unless, that is, you're PolitiFact. As regular readers know, I have, from time to time, taken issue with the fact-checking website's work, but this Cantor example should be an easy one. Cantor said the deficit is growing; the deficit is shrinking; so even PolitiFact can't ignore the straightforward arithmetic. Or so I thought. My colleague Will Femia found this report (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/aug/05/eric-cantor/eric-cantor-says-federal-deficit-growing/) last night.
Cantor said that the federal deficit is "growing." Annual federal deficits are not growing right now, and they are not projected to grow through 2015, a point at which the deficit will have shrunk by three-quarters since 2009. By this standard, Cantor is wrong. However, unless policies are changed, deficits are projected to grow again in 2016 and beyond, according to the CBO. On balance, we rate his claim Half True. You've got to be kidding me. I would have hoped for a "Pants on Fire" rating, but would have settled for at least a "False" conclusion. But the House Majority Leader can make a claim that's the polar opposite of reality and it's "half true"? Seriously? Imagine your home town has experienced a heat wave, which then faded, and I told you, "You know, it's actually getting hotter," despite the fact that it's getting cooler. By PolitiFact's reasoning, my claim may be the opposite of the truth, but it's still "half true" because at some point in the future, it's likely to get hotter again. Imagine we're driving down the highway in a car and I step on the accelerator. I then assure you, "Don't worry, the car is slowing down," despite the fact that the car is speeding up. PolitiFact would apparently say my claim is "half true" because sometime soon, the car will probably decelerate. In theory, I'm not reflexively opposed to the idea of websites fact-checking important claims made by political figures, but if you're going to have the word "fact" in your name, you have a responsibility to get the details right. And too often, PolitiFact just isn't good at its job. But even by its standards, this is a doozy. Cantor said the deficit is growing; PolitiFact knows that the deficit is shrinking; but it nevertheless tells the public that the claim is "half true" because in future years, if certain budget conditions happen a certain way, Cantor's claim might someday become true. I suppose my follow-up question for PolitiFact is this: what incentive do political leaders have to tell the truth when you tell the public their patently false claims are "half true"? http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/deficit
Mainecoons
08-09-2013, 07:11 AM
The FACT is, you never present the real story:
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2013/05/15/dc/97/CBO_Deficits_Estimate_FY12_to_FY23.JPG
Now, ask yourself what happens if interest rates rise, when much of the government's debt is financed short term:
The CBO is highly optimistic about interest rates, even so, they take more and more:
http://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/img/photos/2013/05/15/10/0a/CBO_Spending_as_share_of_GDP_FY12_to_FY23.JPG
Net interest on the debt is also set to skyrocket, more than doubling as a share of GDP during those years, to more than 3 percent from roughly 1.5 percent. All the borrowing of recent years mean interest payments on the debt will take up a larger share of federal spending than either defense spending or non-defense discretionary spending by 2021. In other words, by then, only health care and Social Security will cost federal taxpayers more than debt-interest payments. And we'll be back to accumulating a rising amount of debt each year -- largely to pay for health care and Social Security.This simply isn't sustainable, and the long-term problem overwhelms the decent short-term news in the CBO report.
http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/kyle-wingfield/2013/may/15/cbos-deficit-projections-better-news-now-bad-news-/
http://www.cbo.gov/publication/44024
Cigar
08-09-2013, 07:14 AM
What if ... what if ... what it ... :rollseyes:
FACT: Our Deficit "is" Shrinking ...
Focus Grasshopper ... That's what this Thread is about.
Mainecoons
08-09-2013, 07:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=nbGthv-dJp4
Cigar
08-09-2013, 07:26 AM
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nbGthv-dJp4?feature=player_detailpage" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
http://cdn.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/577477/82599846.jpg
zelmo1234
08-09-2013, 07:37 AM
http://m.static.newsvine.com/servista/imagesizer?file=steve-benen7F64B3ED-BFD5-85EE-6386-7324C46DCB99.jpg&width=380 House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) appeared on Fox News on Sunday, and when the discussion turned to a possible self-imposed budget crisis, the Virginia Republican said (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/08/05/19875985-cantor-confounded-on-compromise?lite) lawmakers should be "focused on trying to deal with the ultimate problem, which is this growing deficit." What Cantor said was the opposite (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/26315908/vp/52681573#52681573) of the truth -- he said the nation has a "growing deficit," when in reality, we have a shrinking deficit (http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/07/12/19435529-as-deficit-shrinks-debt-ceiling-crisis-looms?lite). We can have a discussion about whether the House Majority Leader was deliberately trying to deceive the public -- Republicans have an incentive to convince the public that U.S. finances are in worse shape than they really are -- or whether Cantor simply doesn't know the basics of current events. But I'm afraid it's either one or the other. Unless, that is, you're PolitiFact. As regular readers know, I have, from time to time, taken issue with the fact-checking website's work, but this Cantor example should be an easy one. Cantor said the deficit is growing; the deficit is shrinking; so even PolitiFact can't ignore the straightforward arithmetic. Or so I thought. My colleague Will Femia found this report (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/aug/05/eric-cantor/eric-cantor-says-federal-deficit-growing/) last night. You've got to be kidding me. I would have hoped for a "Pants on Fire" rating, but would have settled for at least a "False" conclusion. But the House Majority Leader can make a claim that's the polar opposite of reality and it's "half true"? Seriously? Imagine your home town has experienced a heat wave, which then faded, and I told you, "You know, it's actually getting hotter," despite the fact that it's getting cooler. By PolitiFact's reasoning, my claim may be the opposite of the truth, but it's still "half true" because at some point in the future, it's likely to get hotter again. Imagine we're driving down the highway in a car and I step on the accelerator. I then assure you, "Don't worry, the car is slowing down," despite the fact that the car is speeding up. PolitiFact would apparently say my claim is "half true" because sometime soon, the car will probably decelerate. In theory, I'm not reflexively opposed to the idea of websites fact-checking important claims made by political figures, but if you're going to have the word "fact" in your name, you have a responsibility to get the details right. And too often, PolitiFact just isn't good at its job. But even by its standards, this is a doozy. Cantor said the deficit is growing; PolitiFact knows that the deficit is shrinking; but it nevertheless tells the public that the claim is "half true" because in future years, if certain budget conditions happen a certain way, Cantor's claim might someday become true. I suppose my follow-up question for PolitiFact is this: what incentive do political leaders have to tell the truth when you tell the public their patently false claims are "half true"? http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/deficit
first, the 2009 for some reason is in RED, for Republican! This of course history will attribute to GWB
But I am willing to assign 2009 to GWB if you are willing to Assign 2001 to Clinton.
Then we can agree that Obamas deficits were not so bad, But of course then GWB will in fact have inherited a deficit, instead of the surplus that the left always wants to remind us of, and of course they forget that we had this little unexpected expense of 911 that took a little money to clean up!
So when an article starts out with a lie? then why should we believe anything that is in it without fact checking it!
And this article when fact checked does not pass the smell test if you know what I mean!
History will show that GWB's largest deficit was 486 billion and that Obama's promise to cut that in half by the end of his first term was not only a lie, but he tripled it!
Mainecoons
08-09-2013, 07:42 AM
It doesn't matter whose deficits are whose. The fact of the matter is that the Federal government is insolvent and a temporary small drop in these deficits, which even they admit won't last long, doesn't change the basic picture. You can't tax your way out of this, you can't grow your way out of this with McJobs and you sure as hell can't get out of this with more government piling on in the form of taxes, regulations and ObamaCare.
zelmo1234
08-09-2013, 07:43 AM
What if ... what if ... what it ... :rollseyes:
FACT: Our Deficit "is" Shrinking ...
Focus Grasshopper ... That's what this Thread is about.
Actually Yes it is shrinking if you compare it to Obamas spending levels.
AND THAT IS A GOOD, NO A GREAT THING FOR THE COUNTRY!
Turns out that that sequester thing is not so bad after all, it has been this administrations best stimulus and the only way they have been forced to stop the runaway spending
keymanjim
08-09-2013, 07:49 AM
http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a128/keymanjim/2009fact_zps3cd789da.jpg (http://s10.photobucket.com/user/keymanjim/media/2009fact_zps3cd789da.jpg.html)
I fixed your chart for you. You're welcome.
In order for us to shrink the budget deficit we first need to have a budget. But, we haven't seen one of those since 2007. Instead, congress has been running the government with spending bills which hold no accountability.
Cigar
08-09-2013, 07:50 AM
:grin:
Cigar
08-09-2013, 10:16 AM
A Poll I’d Like To See
Jonathan Chait finds Rand Paul talking about the evils of “running a trillion-dollar deficit every year” — which, as it happens, is not at all what we’re doing; the deficit is at around $600 billion and falling fast. This follows on Eric Cantor’s talk about “growing deficits”, when deficits are in fact shrinking.
I think it’s pretty clear that Paul actually has no idea that the deficit is falling; it’s quite possible that neither does Cantor. The whole incident reminds me of 2011, when supposedly well-informed candidates like Tim Pawlenty went on about soaring government employment during a time of unprecedented cuts in the public payroll. Once you’re inside the closed conservative information loop, you know lots of things that aren’t so.
What I’m curious about, however, is what the public knows. Larry Bartels likes to cite a 1996 poll in which voters were asked whether the deficit had increased or decreased under Clinton (it had, in fact, fallen sharply). A plurality of voters — and a heavy majority of Republicans — thought the deficit had gone up.
So I’d love to see a comparable poll now — asking, say, what has happened to the deficit since 2009. (It has actually been cut more than 50 percent). My bet is that it would look like that 1996 poll.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/09/a-poll-id-like-to-see/
Chris
08-09-2013, 10:21 AM
But hey the debt just doesn't matter because you can always, as Keynes pointed out, just print more money. That will create inflation that lowers the value of money. Print enough money and the debt becomes worthless.
http://i.snag.gy/clcrz.jpg
Cigar
08-09-2013, 10:27 AM
But hey the debt just doesn't matter because you can always, as Keynes pointed out, just print more money. That will create inflation that lowers the value of money. Print enough money and the debt becomes worthless.
http://i.snag.gy/clcrz.jpg
I guess it only matters when it's going up and a Democrat is President ... just like Employment Numbers, when they start going down ... change the subject. :laugh:
Chris
08-09-2013, 11:16 AM
I guess it only matters when it's going up and a Democrat is President ... just like Employment Numbers, when they start going down ... change the subject. :laugh:
Perhaps for you that's true, but it also mattered when Bush was President and spending like a drunken sailor.
keymanjim
08-09-2013, 11:17 AM
I guess it only matters when it's going up and a Democrat is President ... just like Employment Numbers, when they start going down ... change the subject. :laugh:
Irony.
Agravan
08-09-2013, 11:27 AM
I guess it only matters when it's going up and a Democrat is President ... just like Employment Numbers, when they start going down ... change the subject. :laugh:
And why are the Unemployment numbers going down, Cigar. Is it because everyone's working now, or do you think that all those people that have not found jobs, but exhausted their unemployment benefits are no longer being counted may have some impact on the UE numbers?
Remember, simple math - if you have a population of , say 1000 people, 800 of which are employed and 200 of which are receiving unemployment benefits, then your unemployment rate is 20%. If the 200 that are unemployed exhaust their unemployment benefits, they are no longer counted, which translates to only the 800 working are counted. This would equal a 0% unemployment rate. Is this what your messiah is aiming for?
Cigar
08-09-2013, 11:31 AM
And why are the Unemployment numbers going down, Cigar. Is it because everyone's working now, or do you think that all those people that have not found jobs, but exhausted their unemployment benefits are no longer being counted may have some impact on the UE numbers?
Remember, simple math - if you have a population of , say 1000 people, 800 of which are employed and 200 of which are receiving unemployment benefits, then your unemployment rate is 20%. If the 200 that are unemployed exhaust their unemployment benefits, they are no longer counted, which translates to only the 800 working are counted. This would equal a 0% unemployment rate. Is this what your messiah is aiming for?
Really ... was this your exact complaint the last time the Unemployment Number were the same?
Of course not ... the person who was President was White and Republican :rollseyes:
Chris
08-09-2013, 11:37 AM
Really ... was this your exact complaint the last time the Unemployment Number were the same?
Of course not ... the person who was President was White and Republican :rollseyes:
It probably was. But my you're good at making things up and then criticizing what you make up.
Cigar
08-09-2013, 11:39 AM
It probably was. But my you're good at making things up and then criticizing what you make up.
Why are you unemployed?
patrickt
08-09-2013, 11:53 AM
What if ... what if ... what it ... :rollseyes:
FACT: Our Deficit "is" Shrinking ...
Focus Grasshopper ... That's what this Thread is about.
One of the nice things about weighing 500 pounds is it's so easy to lose 10 pounds. As much as your President and Congress jacked up the deficit it would be no great trick to shrink it. But, it's even easier to simply "adjust" the scale. And people wonder where the Democrat accountants from Enron got jobs.
Chris
08-09-2013, 11:55 AM
Why are you unemployed?
The very question, and comments how well you're doing, implies a lack of understanding of economics.
Cigar
08-09-2013, 11:59 AM
One of the nice things about weighing 500 pounds is it's so easy to lose 10 pounds. As much as your President and Congress jacked up the deficit it would be no great trick to shrink it. But, it's even easier to simply "adjust" the scale. And people wonder where the Democrat accountants from Enron got jobs.
Sucks to Lose I guess ... :wink:
Cigar
08-09-2013, 12:02 PM
The very question, and comments how well you're doing, implies a lack of understanding of economics.
I understand all too well "my" economics and the economics "I" control.
... and at the bottom of the balance sheet, that's all that counts.
Kalkin
08-09-2013, 12:03 PM
The real fact is, we have a growing debt. That's been a fact for decades.
Cigar
08-09-2013, 12:05 PM
The real fact is, we have a growing debt. That's been a fact for decades.
I can't see your FACTS :laugh:
Chris
08-09-2013, 12:17 PM
I understand all too well "my" economics and the economics "I" control.
... and at the bottom of the balance sheet, that's all that counts.
Your finances are not economics.
Chris
08-09-2013, 12:20 PM
I can't see your FACTS :laugh:
Remember that 3 Stooges skit where Curly goes Moe Moe I can't see I can't see and Moe alarmed says what's a matter and Curly says I got my eyes closed? Yuk yuk yuk.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScGPRsHSkaE
Kalkin
08-09-2013, 12:20 PM
I can't see your FACTS :laugh:
It must be some sort of cranial/rectal inversion on your part, then. :)
Chris
08-09-2013, 12:23 PM
It must be some sort of cranial/rectal inversion on your part, then. :)
LOL, but more like...
http://i.snag.gy/gtytH.jpg
Cigar
08-09-2013, 12:26 PM
It must be some sort of cranial/rectal inversion on your part, then. :)
Taken as a no ... what a surprise :rollseyes:
Kalkin
08-09-2013, 12:29 PM
Taken as a no ... what a surprise :rollseyes:
Are you trying to deny that our debt has been increasing every year for at least the last four decades? Or are you just doing the typical liberal shuck-n-jive around facts?
nic34
08-09-2013, 01:35 PM
3496
Looks like going in the right direction......^
Chris
08-09-2013, 01:40 PM
3496
Looks like going in the right direction......^
Compare that with other recessions since WWII, nic, and what do you see?
Kalkin
08-09-2013, 01:50 PM
3496
Looks like going in the right direction......^
The right direction would be spending below revenue and applying the excess to the debt. Anything else is just smoke and mirrors to hide the fact that we're going in the wrong direction, i.e. deeper into debt.
nic34
08-09-2013, 02:15 PM
Compare that with other recessions since WWII, nic, and what do you see?
Record number filibusters in the senate and a do nothing congress...... and growth despite the partisan BS....
Kalkin
08-09-2013, 02:25 PM
Record number filibusters in the senate and a do nothing congress...... and growth despite the partisan BS....
Growth doesn't come from DC, only restrictions on growth.
Chris
08-09-2013, 04:17 PM
Record number filibusters in the senate and a do nothing congress...... and growth despite the partisan BS....
Typical liberal, blame the other guy. Surprised you didn't mention Bush.
Mainecoons
08-09-2013, 04:33 PM
Record number filibusters in the senate and a do nothing congress...... and growth despite the partisan BS....
Spoken like a guy, probably a government worker, who doesn't have to try and live off of a McJob or two.
Peter1469
08-09-2013, 04:36 PM
A train going over the cliff at 100 mph is going to kill the same number of people as a train going over the cliff at 60 mph. :shocked:
zelmo1234
08-09-2013, 05:11 PM
I guess it only matters when it's going up and a Democrat is President ... just like Employment Numbers, when they start going down ... change the subject. :laugh:
Going up?????????????????????????????????????????????
By the end of his 8 years he will have nearly doubled it? If we had been running the / Then record debt of 486 billion dollars the debt would be just over 12.7 trillion dollars right now!
There has to come a time when we look at a problem and acknowledge that it is a problem! At the present time depending on who is in office, determines if it is a problem or not.
Remember what Obama Said about the 486 billion dollar deficit?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zUPZJDBJI84
That IS YOUR GUY TALKING ABOUT THE SAME AMOUNT OF DEBT THAT HE ADDED IN JUST 2.5 YEARS?
Why is it a good thing now?
Here is a hint, the guy in this clip is right!
zelmo1234
08-09-2013, 05:14 PM
Record number filibusters in the senate and a do nothing congress...... and growth despite the partisan BS....
I guess I have to ask, do you really believe that if spending nearly a trillion dollars did not work to stimulate e the economy? a few hundred billion more is going to make a difference?
I have to tell you that doing nothing is preferable to doing something that will cause more harm than good
Mainecoons
08-09-2013, 05:16 PM
How to fudge the unemployment numbers, Obama style: Two McJobs add up to 40 hours per week but we count them as two regular full time jobs.
In my day, we used to call this "dry labing."
nic34
08-09-2013, 05:22 PM
I have to tell you that doing nothing is preferable to doing something that will cause more harm than good
Except the majority of people want things done....
congress +8%
obama +48%
keymanjim
08-09-2013, 06:19 PM
Except the majority of people want things done....
congress +8%
obama +48%
Yeah, that really doesn't mean anything. Every congresscritter has the populations of 49 states and half of the population of their own hating them.
Chris
08-09-2013, 07:29 PM
Except the majority of people want things done....
congress +8%
obama +48%
BS, nic, you can't combine disparate polls to come up with magic.
This is from RCP:
Direction of Country
RCP Average
Right Direction 29.3%
Wrong Track 61.8%
Spread -32.5%
Chris
08-09-2013, 07:30 PM
I guess I have to ask, do you really believe that if spending nearly a trillion dollars did not work to stimulate e the economy? a few hundred billion more is going to make a difference?
I have to tell you that doing nothing is preferable to doing something that will cause more harm than good
But that's always been the liberal solution to liberal failure, just throw more money at it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.