Numbers. It wasn’t that long ago when a billion dollars was a big number.
President Obama is releasing his 2012 budget of $3.73 trillion dollars that includes a $1.15 TRILLION dollar deficit. In commenting on the budget president Obama stated that “the hard truth is that it will require some broad sacrifices.” As I search out the details there are several line items that stand out.
First.”New limits will be placed on deductions for home mortgage interest and charitable contributions.”
Second. “Let the Bush tax cuts for couples earning over $250,000 per year to lapse after Dec. 31, 2012.”
Third. Returning the estate tax in 2013.
It appears that third rail programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are each on auto pilot.
In responding to the proposed budget House Speaker (R) John Bohner said: “We’re broke,” …. “What’s really dangerous is if we continue to do nothing and allow the status quo to stay in place. When are we going to get serious about cutting spending?”
This will be a test of wills as the GOP controlled House takes a stand on further budget reductions.
What influence will the freshman class of Tea Party representatives have in the final outcome?
While I have yet to explore the proposed budget let me provide a White House link as follows:
Juice reader comments are encouraged.
Red ink budget
Given that Rand Paul put forth such a good plan I would rather see that one discussed. Obama’s should be dead on arrival.
Andy.
And an update from Tim Geithner:
“Barack Obama may lose the advantage of low borrowing costs as the U.S. Treasury Department says what it pays to service the national debt is poised to triple amid record budget deficits.
Interest expense will rise to 3.1 percent of gross domestic product by 2016, from 1.3 percent in 2010 with the government forecast to run cumulative deficits of more than $4 trillion through the end of 2015, according to page 23 of a 24-page presentation made to a 13-member committee of bond dealers and investors that meet quarterly with Treasury officials. ”
So we continue to be addicted. Someone once called a friend by a nickname of “easy money” which describes how China has become an “enabler” of our president.
Enough is enough. Let’s see if Congress can do what is in the best interest of our country rather than worrying if their vote will impact their next election.
@ Larry G:
thanks for the post!
1) the deficit I think is $1.15 TRILLION and not $1.15 billion.
2) Our US total annual GDP is about $14 Trillion. The real federal unfunded liability (long term deficit) is about $66 trillion (about $46 trillion is made up of unfunded Social Security; Medicare; Medicaid). This is worsening by the day.
The longer we wait the worse it gets as Baby Boomers start retiring to the tune of 75-80 million in the next couple few years.
The current Congress is just kicking this issue down the street, by calling for more commissions to “study” the issue. If someone has been in Congress for more than 2 years – you would expect them to have a very good grip on the issue…yet I think that they fail by not addressing the issue head on.
Thank you Paco. Trillion, billion, both numbers are above my pay grade. I’ve made the correction on the post but sent out a few hundreds emails. Oh well.
Are you really advocating for cuts in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?
Too many American families are already living on the edge and unless there are drastic changes in our tax code (as in higher taxes on the wealthy and corporations) things are only going to get worse. As it is, the average family can’t save for retirement and they sure as hell aren’t going to be able to afford their own healthcare plans when they’re old.
From; Ask Liz Weston » Liz’s Blog » Expected health care costs in retirement: $250,000
03/25/2010
Expected health care costs in retirement: $250,000
“Fidelity’s latest estimate of what a 65-year-old couple needs to have saved for medical costs in retirement has gone up again, to $250,000.
That’s a 56% increase from the $160,000 the investment giant estimated a retiring couple would need in 2002. The estimate assumes the couple qualifies for Medicare but doesn’t have employer-provided health insurance, and does not include nursing home care.”
THIS IS REALITY;
The median household income in the United States is $46,326. Here in California people have a hard time understanding that yes, 50 percent of our population live on $46,000 or less a year. Even today, all the elixirs and remedies being thrown around fail to focus on income and the big brother of income, solid employment. Dual earner households have a higher median income at $67,348.
http://www.mybudget360.com/how-much-does-the-average-american-make-breaking-down-the-us-household-income-numbers/
Where’s the money? I suggest you read this article and pay close attention to those graphs/pie charts at the bottom.
http://www.truth-out.org/nine-pictures-of-the-extreme-incomewealth-gap67743
Anonster,
It’s too bad that we currently are stuck with Obamacare, complete with its attack on Medicare, higher taxes for all (particularly tough on the middle class and poor), sweet waivers for Obama’s friends, only adding to an already bloated deficit, rather than real reform (tort reform, selling insurance across state lines, etc.) that would actually lower premiums and address the problems you’re highlighting. But hey, once Pelosi actually reads the bill, maybe there will be a crumb or two for the people who need it the most.
Newbie,
You’ve got to stop listening to Republicans, they don’t really care about poor, sick people, the “let us buy insurance across state lines” line, is not a solution to health care costs or as Ezra Klein put it;
A terrible, no good, very bad health-care idea
“That is to say, the legislation would not change the number of insured Americans or save much money, but it would make insurance more expensive for the sick and cheaper for the healthy, and lead to more healthy people with insurance and fewer sick people with insurance. It’s a great proposal if you don’t ever plan to be sick, and if you don’t mind finding out that your insurer doesn’t cover your illness. And it’s the Republican plan for health-care reform.”
For the full article go to;
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/selling_insurance_across_state.html
Newbie,
FYI taxes are the lowest they’ve been for 60 years, if you want to stay in touch with REALITY, you might might try turning off Faux News.
Oh and Newbie, Tort reform has already been enacted in many states and it really only would reduce health care costs by about 2%, again, NOT a solution.
Anonster.
What I am reporting is that the sacred trio are not on the chopping block as both sides fear the backlash.
While we have your attention, what trillion dollars of programs are you willing to live without to have a balanced budget?
A balanced budget is something that every state’s governor must present to his or her residents while the federal government can operate on red ink.
Gosh Larry, speaking of “red ink”, we could have lived without Bush’s unnecessary wars and we should have RAISED TAXES to pay for them, but you Republicans think that the budget should NOW be balanced, and preferably on the backs of the poor, the sick and the elderly.
Republicans have no credibility on this issue, deficits didn’t matter when they were skyrocketing under Bush and they don’t matter when budget busting tax cuts for the wealthy need to be passed.
Time to cue the cadillac driving welfare queen, the Republicans need a scapegoat.
anoster would love for the usa to be canada or cuba . SHE IS ONE OF THOSE .. RICH PEOPLE ARE BAD . REPS ARE BAD . libs are always right zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz please anoster TURN OFF MSHATE BC AND JOIN YOUR PAL KEITH O OR BILL MAHRE YOU FIT RIGHT IN WITH THEM .
Off your meds? This is a site for growups, you know.
Let’s talk about defense contractor cuts and agribusiness subsidies — the things Republican’s won’t touch. Tort reform? Another red herring, and it’s a code word for screwing injured people.