Our “unpatriotic” deficit

Do any of you remember President Obama’s 2008 campaign wherein he called President Bush unpatriotic for the amount of Bush’s annual deficit, and, wherein, he further, pledged to cut that annual deficit in half?

According to the following chart, in the last year of Bush’s presidency our annual deficit was $459 billion.  For fiscal 2012, our deficit was $1.1 trillion.

 

image

Let’s flash forward to President Obama’s 2012 campaign rhetoric.  He campaigned on eliminating the Bush tax cuts for “millionaires and billionaires” as the solution to our ever increasing deficit. And, according to his definition, those millionaires and billionaires are individuals who make more that $200,000 per year (or $250,000 for a family).
 
Here is what you need to know.
… the Joint Tax Committee estimates this would yield only $82 billion a year in extra revenue.
I may be missing something, but, I have difficulty understanding how $82 billion a year in new tax revenue will offset a $1.1 trillion deficit. 
 
But there is more to learn.  Looking to at above chart, our 2012 tax receipts were only $119 billion less than they were in 2007, and yet, our government spending was $809,000 higher than it was in 2007. 
 
There are not enough “millionaires and billionaires” in this country to make up that difference even if the government confiscated all of their income. 
 
So, don’t be surprised if next year the President tells us that taxing the rich doesn’t get the job done, and thus everyone, to be “patriotic”, will have to pay more. 
 
Everyone who is paying income taxes, that is.
 
 
22 replies
  1. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    Like Slick Willie said during the convention: it’s all about the math.?? Republicans may not be great at math, but at least they are not performing liberal legerdemain.

  2. once was
    once was says:

    The Federal fiscal year runs from October to October, when is the President going to propose a budget or, did I miss something?? ?

  3. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Definitely better to let the Bush tax cuts expire for everyone, so everyone gets a tax increase (except, naturally, a large portion of the now (in)famous 47%).

    • JBS
      JBS says:

      With more money, the Democrats can expand on the 47%. There’s a benefit!
      ?
      Very soon, we will only have one party.
      ?
      What is a country with one party called?
      ?
      ?
      ?

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      Actually, yes.? If everyone has skin in the game, they aren’t going to vote themselves tax increases.? Everyone price shops when it is their money.
      ?
      Besides, we all know that the Bush tax cuts only benefited the rich, so what is the harm in abandoning them?
      ?
      A flat tax is the only fair tax.

  4. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    Not to worry, Lynn. With the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, we all will get a tax increase AND many billions of mandatory budget cuts. That was the deal demanded by the House Republicans for a higher debt ceiling. Then, there will be less money to be borrowed (and a lower debt service). Everybody will be happy, yes?

  5. yeah
    yeah says:

    the cuts are a pittance, unfortunately.? yeah, let’s skip the latte but go upgrade the BMW, then pat ourselves on the back for “having saved some money.”
    what is so hard about understanding that we put 42 cents out of every dollar on a credit card?? and is there something hard to understand about that causing fiscal problems?
    ?
    the federal government needs to be trimmed by at least 50%.

  6. JBS
    JBS says:

    Obama may present a budget, but will CongressCritters actually vote for it? Why bother?
    More to the point, my concern is: At what point will individuals and businesses be unable to carry the fiscal burden of government? (percent of income confiscated by taxes, GDP growth or lack thereof, decrease in personal income, overall growth of government, increasing resistance to paying taxes, added costs of ObamaCare mandates, continued swelling of he 47%, outright rebellion, etc.?)
    Jim V. has been right all along on this one. There are too many in the wagon and too few pulling it. It would be one thing if the takers in the wagon were content — they aren’t. They want more and more from government.
    To most people, the deficit and the debt are just numbers. Only when those numbers start to hurt the wagon pullers in the pocket that we will see action. I don’t expect it to be pretty.
    ?

    • Lynn
      Lynn says:

      Murphy you are correct. In my post, I should have said we should cut government costs first, then pass a budget. I wear rose colored glasses and wish this will happen? In my heart, I know it will not happen.

  7. Plainvillian
    Plainvillian says:

    The US passed into ethical bankruptcy long ago so it is only expected that actual bankruptcy should follow.? The central planners and their supporters have condemned future generations to a dystopia of broken promises, shattered dreams and non-existent opportunity.? History would indicate it will not be a tranquil transition or result.

  8. dennis
    dennis says:

    Here is a solution for all the Kool Aid drinkers. All the people who voted for Obama, Approx. 50 Million should contribute an amount that will balance the budget. After all isn’t that what they said by voting for him that they are willing to pay their fair share. The figure would be only about $20,000 per person. OOPS?I forgot 47% or so don’t have the money to pay and besides we can take more from the givers which just happens to be the 50 million that voted against Obama.

    • JBS
      JBS says:

      You might well be on to something. Think of it! All of the non-payers actually paying income taxes. The Congress Critters would be like drunks with so much money!
      Cutting spending has to be part of the equation along with getting everyone to pay for the government that they use.
      There is the concept of proprietary ownership. A person appreciated something more when they have a vested interest in it. Like paying for it.? How novel.
      That only seems FAIR.
      ?

  9. kateinmaine
    kateinmaine says:

    drop the wagon, pull up a chair–it’s gonna be a heck of a show!
    for those paying attention, there is no money being ‘borrowed’–no one is interested in extending ‘credit’ or buying (no one is stupid enough to bite on that ‘investment’ opportunity) u.s. debt.? there is a shell game going on between treasury and the fed–the junk bond debacle will pale in comparison when this one hits the fan.
    ‘rich’ will continue to be redefined, right down to the $60k level that algore used–and still, unexpectedly, there will not be enough to feed the pig–more ‘unintended consequences’.? this isn’t rocket science–it doesn’t require math–it’s a confidence game.? ct’s own pt barnum had it right–there’s one (or 47%) born every minute!
    if there is no budget, there is no deficit–correct?? if it’s not ‘spending’, it’s ‘investment’, it’s not a problem–correct?? if there is no money, print more–correct?? ‘the private sector is doing fine’–correct? ? ‘i am the president’–correct?? there is nothing to fear but fear itself–correct???
    relax and enjoy the show!
    ?

    • Lynn
      Lynn says:

      Ok, I get it. Kate, you have explained it brilliantly. I forgot the lesson President Clinton taught us! “it depends on what the definition of is, is”. I thought President Clinton developed political parsing of words to a high art. But, he was a novice compared to President Obama’s handlers.?

      When I get my sense of humor back, I will watch the show.?

  10. sammy22
    sammy22 says:

    I don’t get it. From the table in SOS’s post one can see that since 2009 revenues have been going up and the deficit has been going down. What do you want? Oh, I see, you want the deficit (and the debt, too) to disappear in 2 mos, 6 mos, 1 year? We’re still paying for Afghanistan on the credit card after 10 years.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      I see the effect of the election of Republicans to the House in 2010 taking away ?bama’s carte blanche spending ability.?
      ?
      What did you see again?

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] told you on Monday that eliminating the Bush tax cuts for?individuals making more than $200,000 per year, as demanded […]

Comments are closed.