Misery Index soaring under Obama

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Okay, what would you say that congress did that caused the loss of the surplus?

Out of control spending.

 

[bugscoe]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Actually both parties supported them, but they are the reason that the deficits were so high during the Republican president's 2009 budget. So if someone posts here that they are upset about "Obama's" deficits then they are ill-informed.

How are they "ill-informed'?

Why is the CBO projecting the deficit for this fiscal year to reach a record $1.5 trillion?

Why are democrats refusing to pass a budget resolution for the coming fiscal year?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Lucrum:

Out of control spending.

Not quite, no. Congress didn't jack up spending except for items that the Republicans demanded, such as wars and tax breaks (all unpaid for, of course). Take a look at this:

<img src="http://www.goiam.org/images/articles/imail/latest-imail/July-2010/07_27_2010_deficit_graph.jpg">

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from bugscoe:

How are they "ill-informed'?

Why is the CBO projecting the deficit for this fiscal year to reach a record $1.5 trillion?

Why are democrats refusing to pass a budget resolution for the coming fiscal year?

Here's an excellent answer to your first question -- the CBO has created a graph where you can click on various policy alternatives to see their effect on the budget deficit (higher lines are better).

http://www.goiam.org/images/articles/imail/latest-imail/July-2010/07_27_2010_deficit_graph.jpg

As you can see from their website, the projected deficit for 2010 is $1.4 trillion, which is significantly better than the $1.5 trillion Republican catastrophe. Next year it's projected be even lower. Much of those costs for 2010 are, again, carryover costs from unpaid for wars on the other side of the planet and unpaid for tax cuts.

As for your second question, congress hasn't passed a budget on time since 1998 at least according to Fox News. And if you can't trust Fox News to get the facts right... *cough*. Okay, I'll have to look that one up.

 

[bigdavediode]

Sorry about that, I posted the wrong link -- here's the link to the CBO:

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/108xx/doc10871/BudgetOutlook2010_Jan.cfm

 

[bugscoe]

Quote from bigdavediode:

As for your second question, congress hasn't passed a budget on time since 1998 at least according to Fox News. And if you can't trust Fox News to get the facts right... *cough*. Okay, I'll have to look that one up.

My question was, why?

from Politico:

Democratic insiders suspect that leaders will skip the budget process altogether this year — a way to avoid the political unpleasantness of voting on spending, deficits and taxes in an election year — or simply go through a few of the motions, without any real effort to complete the work.

 

[bugscoe]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Here's an excellent answer to your first question -- the CBO has created a graph where you can click on various policy alternatives to see their effect on the budget deficit (higher lines are better).

http://www.goiam.org/images/articles/imail/latest-imail/July-2010/07_27_2010_deficit_graph.jpg

As you can see from their website, the projected deficit for 2010 is $1.4 trillion, which is significantly better than the $1.5 trillion Republican catastrophe.

How is this a "Republican catastrophe" when:

Quote from bigdavediode:

Actually both parties supported them

?

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Not quite, no. Congress didn't jack up spending...

Doesn't most if not ALL spending go through congress?

Your obvious spin to make it look like all republicans bad/all democrats = good is tiresome and falling on deaf ears.

Example: many if not most democrats favored and voted for funding the wars that you mention.

To try and spin everything into the republicans are the source of all our ills shows your extreme bias and imo severely hurts your credibility with most here.

 

[Trader666]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misery_index_(economics)

http://www.miseryindex.us/customind...2001-01&EndYear=2010-08&submit1=Create+Report

Quote from bigdavediode:

That was quite a few years ago. But for you, I'll make time. That article is an embarrassment to anyone who's thoughtful. It hurt, it was so stupid.

So let's take a look at Shadowstats.

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

Just going from the graph and using the correct pre-1990 calculations, Bush's last misery index would be about 27 at the end of his term (Carter's worst was about 20.5). Obama's is currently around 24 and appears to have leveled off or dropping.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from bugscoe:

My question was, why?

from Politico:

Because there's a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit that the Republicans are attempting to pin on them, would be my guess.

Naturally the Republicans are claiming this has never happened before, even though this procedure (or very similar) happened in 1999, 2003, 2005 and 2007.