Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-14-2007, 01:53 PM
 
Location: Chicago
4,688 posts, read 10,085,147 times
Reputation: 3207

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Per this chart,
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfa....cfm?Docid=200
yearly +/- is
2000 - $236.2 Billion SURPLUS
2001 - $125.2 Billion SURPLUS
2002 - $151.3 Billion DEFICIT
2003 - $352.8 Billion DEFICIT
2004 - $374.8 Billion DEFICIT
2005 - $279.1 Billion DEFICIT
2006 - $210.0 Billion DEFICIT

$1Trillion deficit not $1.75Trillion.. (not that $1Trillion is chump change).

2007 Shows an expected deficit of $202.2 Billion, Per this graph http://jec.senate.gov/charts/Iraq%20Economic%20Cost%20Report/chart4.pdf (broken link) we're spending more then $225 Billion this year for just the war and infrastructure.. Which means that we should have a surplus of $23.8Billion, not a deficit this year. (I gave a pass at the last 3 expenses on that page because they are future expenses, but if I added them in, it would show a surplus of $83.8Billion).
I looked at current, not constant. But if you constant dollars, including the 2007 estimate (as we are in mid December), its 1.57 trillion. And I have a feeling that OMB estimate does not include the accurate costs of the Iraq war in 2007. Bottom line though is this, the Iraq War has cost us an insane amount of money. But even if we hadn't decided to waste so many resources there, we'd still be in a deep deficit.

There's no way around that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-14-2007, 02:43 PM
 
Location: Washington DC
626 posts, read 991,649 times
Reputation: 141
What you mean is ~$1 trillion of debt has accrued since Bush took office. He's the problem with that statement. The national debt has increased by far more than $1 trillion since Bush took office. The total debt was about $5.7 trillion when Bush took office. Now it's over $9.1 trillion. That's an increase of $3.4 trillion, not $1 trillion.

You can get this data directly from the Treasure Department's website.

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPD...application=np
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:15 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top