posted on January 13, 2007 10:29:55 AM new
Deficit Falls to Lowest Level in 4 Years
Jan 12 2:33 PM US/Eastern
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) --
The federal deficit has improved significantly in the first three months of the new budget year, helped by a continued surge in tax revenues.
In its monthly budget report, the Treasury Department said Friday that the deficit from October through December totaled $80.4 billion, the smallest imbalance for the first three months of a budget year since The budget year ends Sept. 30.
Tax collections are running 8.2 percent higher than a year ago while government spending is up by just 0.7 percent from a year ago.
Last year's spending totals were boosted by significant payments to help the victims of the Gulf Coast hurricanes.
The Treasury said for December, the government actually ran a surplus of $44.5 billion, the largest surplus ever recorded in December and a gain that reflected a big jump in quarterly corporate tax payments.
The $80.4 billion deficit for the first three months of the current budget year was down 32.6 percent from the imbalance for the same period a year ago of $119.4 billion.
For the year, analysts are still forecasting that the deficit will worsen from last year's total of $248.2 billion, which had been the lowest in four years.
The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the 2007 budget year will rise to $286 billion, an increase of 15.2 percent from last year, but that figure could be lowered when the CBO releases its revised estimate later this month.
The Bush administration is currently even more pessimistic, predicting a deficit for 2007 of $339.2 billion, but that figure will also be revised when the administration releases its new budget request to Congress on Feb. 5.
Bush, who took office while the country was running record surpluses, saw the deficit hit an all-time high in dollar terms of $413 billion in 2004.
President Bush has said his new budget will outline a path to eliminate the deficit completely by 2012.
For the first three months of the current budget year, revenues total $573.5 billion, an increase of 8.2 percent from tax collections in the same period a year ago. Outlays totaled $653.9 billion, up 0.7 percent from a year ago.
___
On the Net:
Federal budget: http://www.fms.treas.gov/
posted on January 13, 2007 10:51:06 AM new
"""For the year, analysts are still forecasting that the deficit will worsen from last year's total of $248.2 billion, which had been the lowest in four years.
The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the 2007 budget year will rise to $286 billion, an increase of 15.2 percent from last year, but that figure could be lowered when the CBO releases its revised estimate later this month.
The Bush administration is currently even more pessimistic, predicting a deficit for 2007 of $339.2 billion, but that figure will also be revised when the administration releases its new budget request to Congress on Feb. 5.
Bush, who took office while the country was running record surpluses,
saw the deficit hit an all-time high in dollar terms of $413 billion in 2004.""""
posted on January 13, 2007 11:09:04 AM new
It was a PROJECTED surplus....not an actual one. Please keep that straight.
Plus there have been a ton of expenditures that were totally necessary.
We were in the beginning of a recession when he took office. We have fought in two wars....we had to recover from 9-11, economically, we had to put out all that money for the hurricanes...etc....etc...etc. Not counting the entitlement program all dems wanted for drug coverage...not counting all the educational expenditures that the dems wanted.....not counting all the increases that our vets were given....I could go on....but intelligent people get the point.
Now...because of his tax cuts...our economy has greatly improved....unemployent has continued to do down...and REVENUES have continued to increase....thus bring the previous spending down automatically. As he said it would do.
Now...if the dems don't go about screwing all that up......by not approving the continuation of the tax rate decreases.....by not continuing to make loop holes on pork spending....and by restraining ALL their current proposed SPENDING...then this positive path might continue.
But sure sounds to me like the dems can't WAIT to put us more in debt.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 13, 2007 12:20:27 PM newBush, who took office while the country was running record surpluses, saw the deficit hit an all-time high in dollar terms of $413 billion in 2004.
SOMEONE ONLY CARES TO READ PART OF THE ARTICLE.
It was a PROJECTED surplus....not an actual one. Please keep that straight.
ONCE AGAIN SOMEONE IS TRYING TO REWRITE HISTORY AND PRESENT DIFFERENT NUMBERS FROM WHAT WAS ACTUALLY REPORTED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. Now Linda is calling the federal government liars because she has audited the records of the government. She has more information to back up her claim.
WHY DON'T YOU TRY LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL NUMBERS PRESNTED BY THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE YOU WILL SEE YOU ARE WRONG, WRONG, WRONG !!!
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
----------------------------------
The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
[ edited by logansdad on Jan 15, 2007 12:03 PM ]
posted on January 13, 2007 12:26:57 PM new
lol logansdad.....ANYONE who looks at the 'tally board' for how much debt America carrys - and checks out where our deficit WAS when clinton left office will SEE the truth.
We have NEVER had that tally showing zero.
please get a clue.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 13, 2007 12:32 PM ]
posted on January 13, 2007 12:30:07 PM new
And what I also want to add is that with that PROJECTED surplus....the dems of course had all kinds of things they want to spend it on.
This President did the right thing....since the PEOPLE had overpaid their taxes....he gave it BACK to them. To put in their OWN pockets and decide how THEY wanted to spend THEIR OWN money.
I thought that was a first.
And I truly admired him for having the GUTS to do that....rather than spend the overage on something else.
VERY wise of him to do.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 14, 2007 02:15:20 PM newrather than spend the overage on something else
Now you are admitting there was a surplus. How could Bush possibly give something back that was not there (your so-called projected surplus). If there was only a projected surplus Bush could not have given it back becase we would have been further into debt.
checks out where our deficit WAS when clinton left office will SEE the truth
I have Linda, and you are wrong like usual. Tha actual budget SURPLUS for the fiscal year ending 2000 (the last one that was made before Clinton left office) shows a budget surplus (see table 1.1) Are you going to make a liar out of the federal government now. You have no actual proof to back up your so called claim.
//www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy06/hist.html
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on January 14, 2007 02:32:23 PM new
No....I admitted no such thing. I stated that we STILL had a TON of debt as a nation when clinton left office.
The PROJECTED surplus was just that. But it does NOT mean this Nation HAD NO DEBT.
Try and grasp that concept.
OUR debt 'meter' that kiara has often posted here....still showed the US was in debt.
Try to find it....prove it to yourself.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 14, 2007 02:55:02 PM new
From the OP:
"""Bush, who took office while the country was running record surpluses, saw the deficit hit an all-time high in dollar terms of $413 billion in 2004. """
This administration took office in the third week of Jan. 2001.
WE, the US, were still under the clinton administration budget UNTIL 9-01.
Then read this:
As of March 31, 2001, the U.S. government had a gross debt of $5.8 trillion, of which
$3.4 trillion or 59.5 percent was net debt held by the public and $2.3 trillion or 40.5 percent was
held in intragovernmental accounts.
5
Economists consider net debt as the proper measure of
federal debt. Increasing (or decreasing) net debt represents a withdrawal of money from (or a
release of money to) financial markets and may affect the broader economy.
Publicly issued
Treasuries represent legally binding commitments with other parties that cannot be abrogated.
In
contrast, the U.S. government is both the creditor and the debtor for Treasuries held in
intragovernmental accounts.
President Bill Clinton explained this point in his Fiscal Year 2000
Budget:
These balances [in intragovernmental accounts] are available - but only in a bookkeeping sense.
6
Thus, an increase (or a decrease) of Treasuries in these accounts is merely a bookkeeping entry that does not affect financial markets or the broader economy.
Placing Treasuries in an
intragovernmental account is similar to lending money to yourself. You may increase your loan
balance infinitely or pay off it entirely, but neither action can change the amount of money in your pocket.
5
U.S. Department of the Treasury, Bureau of the Public Debt, Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (Washington,
D.C.: Government Printing Office, March 2001),
edited to correct dates/year
[ edited by Linda_K on Jan 14, 2007 07:27 PM ]
posted on January 14, 2007 04:16:23 PM new
Haha Goober!
Nothing changes YOUR ....
""""Bush, who took office while the country was running record surpluses, saw the deficit hit an all-time high in dollar terms of $413 billion in 2004. """
Unless , of course, you admit you were LYING in the OP
posted on January 14, 2007 04:51:23 PM new
My OP pointed out nothing more than that the projected deficit is now the lowest it's been in 4 years.
Just as you speak about the 'projected surplus' that you say we had in 2001.
What I've shown you is that in the past at least 20 years...American HAS NEVER BEEN DEBT FREE.
Stonecold mentioned that before also....but was just ignored. It's the FACT...look it up yourself....AMERICAN DEBT HISTORY
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on January 15, 2007 12:03:39 PM newAs of March 31, 2001, the U.S. government had a gross debt of $5.8 trillion, of which $3.4 trillion or 59.5 percent was net debt held by the public and $2.3 trillion or 40.5 percent was held in intragovernmental accounts.
If that was the case then why in the heck would Bush be giving refunds. As you pointed out: This President did the right thing....since the PEOPLE had overpaid their taxes....he gave it BACK to them. To put in their OWN pockets and decide how THEY wanted to spend THEIR OWN money.
Thsi would only have made the deficit worse. Doesn't make much economic sense to me.
WE, the US, were still under the clinton administration budget UNTIL 9-01.
It does not matter who made the budget, it was Bush that spent the money. Clinton was not in office except for 20 days in 2001. It is not Clinton's fault that Bush did not know how to spend what was budgeted for.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on January 16, 2007 10:26:02 AM new
Just as I thought, when confronted with the facts Crybaby_K runs and hides. She can't admit that the US had a surplus.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
