Total debt is budgeted to increase from $11.9 trillion in FY2009, to $13.8 trillion in FY2010, and $15.1 trillion in FY2011. Where did he cut the budget?

Within military and discretionary spending.

Why is the bottom line increasing? Because Bush started unfunded wars, unfunded drug Rx givaway and unfunded tax cuts. We had to borrow money to pay for those things, with interest.

The expense of borrowing to pay for those items and the interest make up a good portion of our current budget deficit, and keep increasing (cost of Iraq spread over 10 years, etc).

Bush increased our spending markedly, while decreasing our real income. Then we had to borrow, with interest, over time, to pay for all of it. And that interest is accumulating.

So attributing a bottom line increase in the budget to Obama isn't accurate - a major portion the budget is borrowed money with interest, to keep making payments on things when Bush gave out the tax cuts without cutting spending.

We had to borrow the money with interest to make up for our income loss.

We had to borrow money with interest to pay for the wars, and the drug giveaway.

And those costs were not paid for during the Bush administration, they are carried out over years, with the interest compounding onto whomever comes subsequently.

So the bottom line increases, even as the budget is cut. That is why spending cuts alone, without raising our revenue, will never, ever put us in the black.

The facts are the greatest part of our deficit is the money we borrow with interest to replace the revenue lost with the tax cuts, because spending was not cut at that time (the cuts were not paid for) The other great cost was the money borrowed with interest to pay for the unfunded wars.

ok, I get it now. It is all Bush's fault. If I remember right Obama extended the bush tax cuts...

Wow. Way to totally ignore the point.

You asked why the budget is increasing. It is because we have had to borrow money over the long term, with interest, and we continue to borrow money, long term with interest, to pay for unfunded wars and tax cuts and prescriptions.

The portion of the budget and deficit attributable to TARP, to the two stimulus, to the bailouts (auto all paid back now anyway) is small. The normal discretionary portion of the budget is very small compared to the rest, and Obama has indeed cut that.

That's simply the truth. The discretionary portion of the budget is tiny. We could stop paying for all of Medicare, and Social Security, and all discretionary things, and the money we owe would continue to increase over the next ten years until it tops out.

You think Obama increased the budget? Please - itemize out the budget to show where that is. (edit - here are two charts at the bottom and the information http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3490 )

The majority of budget increases we are seeing is money and interest we owe on borrowed money due to things bought on credit in the Bush years. There is no way to ignore that.

Yes, I was completely against Obama extending the Bush tax cuts. It was the wrong move. They need to expire and help us cut the deficits.

No really I get it. It was Bush's fault.

Yes, it was Bush's fault. But that wasn't the meaning or point of my post, was it? My post wasn't political, it was financial. Why is our budget going up with the figures you posted? I had an answer, backed by figures. You think it's wrong? You say it is due to Obama? The contributions of figures for the Bush and Obama bailouts, TARP and the stimulus are right in the graph I posted.

So do tell - please, give us an itemized list of the budget, and what components make it up, so we can see the difference.

such a psychopath.

"I hate Obama. He's responsible for everything I want to blame him for. Facts don't matter"

The U.S. National Debt and How It Got So Big
http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscal.../p/US_Debt.htm

Obama approved increasing funding for some of those plans that are part of that prescription deal you rail Bush for daily.

We're still at war. He's actually increased defense spending.

You're a hypocrite because of a school girl crush.

It's ok.

That's right. The increased Rx deal is part of the PPACA and that entire thing comes out to net zero budget increase (it's paid for).

Feel free to itemize how the defense spending has increased with Libya compared to the drawdowns in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Then you can tell us how Obama, and not our previous debt borrowing w/interest, is reponsible for the the budget increases that Wiphan is so desperately worried about laying at Obama's feet.

Or can you only make unsupported statements and call names, because you only have interest in hating who you hate, and those that don't agree with your politics, and not discussing politics or finance?

So your logic is these programs that Bush introduced are bad but since we've got them now with Obama they're o.k.

You're a psychopath.

Can't support statements about budget. Must change subject, make up strawman, try insults.

Only a psychopath would believe something is "paid for" when we're showing a deficit of $14.3 trillion.

Fuzzy math all you want, Riot. You're wrong and clinically insane. Deal with it.

Can't. Understand. Numbers. Make up more strawman! Default. Insult!

Obama is your Hare Krishna we get it.

Psychopath.

"Total debt is budgeted to increase from $11.9 trillion in FY2009, to $13.8 trillion in FY2010, and $15.1 trillion in FY2011."

Tell me what makes up the budget.

Let me get some popcorn.

"Hey I've got $140,000 in debt but I found $500 in an old pair of khakis. I'm going to say f.uck it and pay the monthly minimum and use this $500 on my b.itch. She whines all the f.ucking time and this will shut her up. Plus she'll suck my d.ick and fight other b.itches and haters who be on me for being a stupid, broke ass buster."

I've got her defending a program she uses as a talking point against us.

She's that insane, people.

psychopath

Nah but I'll reveal who you are...

Pillow Pants 2011: Desperately arguing against things I've never said.

Good popcorn :D

You've made five posts since I asked you to support your budget statement. Still can't do it, huh?

Rage eating isn't my thing. To each his OWNED though.

I'm busy reading articles on hedge fund managers and doomsday farmland purchases.

I'm sure these cats are just crazy and don't follow fuzzy math either.

But I'll bet they can read post #82, rather than falsely thinking I said something I didn't, and doing a silly victory dance that makes them look very silly ;)

Only a lunatic would try and sincerely, not sarcastically, claim victory in a discussion about programs that are adding to our staggering deficit. The program isn't paid for. No program on the table is paid for when we're holding over $14 trillion in debt.

Even half-retarded people have the ability to comprehend this.

Your obsession with him is insane.

I like the fact that Obama is a deficit cutting King and Scott Walker is the Devil.

I missed your explaination of your absolute statement that it's Obama that has increased the budget. Still waiting for your dissection of the budget years you posted, and Obama's contribution to each.

alright coach, i can't figure it out.

who is that in your avatar?

Nathan Mayer Rothschild

i see, thanks.

How about the Stimulus Package? Did that increase the budget deficit with no real stimulus or benefit?

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) asked the Congressional Budget Office to estimate the impact of permanently extending the 20 most popular provisions of the stimulus bill. What did the CBO find? The true 10 year cost of the stimulus bill $2.527 trillion in in spending with another $744 billion cost in debt servicing. Total bill for the Generational Theft Act: $3.27 trillion

But again Obama is a deficit cutting king and everything is Bush's fault.

amazing that in 8 years, even with 9-11 the debt raised almost $5 trillion under W Bush and with just one misguided program Obama adds $3.27 trillion. And some still bill it as a success. :wf

Again, nice of you to quote numbers about a variety of different programs, and your personal opinion that the stimulus failed (not shared by most economics, btw).

But still waiting for you to show that the majority of the budget is due to some reckless Obama spending spree as you maintain.

I showed, with good data, that it isn't. I showed what the cost of the stimulus was in our debt picture (very small).

And some are so blinded to disliking Obama they dismiss the reality of our financial situation and not only what got us here, but what is costing us big in borrowed money and interest payments over now and years to come.

It sure as hell wasn't Obama.

Bush more than doubled our national debt in 6 years. Obama kept us out of a depression, using a necessary stimulus package that most say wasn't even enough as the recession is a slow recovery.

The stimulus packages cost are a tiny part of our national debt obligation - the cost of which most is already gone, and will be even more so within 2 years - while the borrowing with interest to pay for the Bush debaucle of credit card charging and giving away our revenue is more than half, and is with us for years.

Hard to spin reality. Calling Obama the big spender for domestic spending (which he has cut, including Medicare, although discretionary is only like 16% of our budget) and stimulus - both comprising only a tiny portion of our debt obligation - is ludicrous and not supported by any facts.

The below chart clearly shows how tiny the cost of the stimulus and bailouts were, and how terribly expensive and disastrous increasing spending while cutting our revenue was - because we had to borrow that money with interest, and we are paying it back to China and others forever.

It's the dark gold on this chart that is borrowed money, with interest, that is increasing over time. Thank you, George W. Bush. You didn't even give us a kiss. And yes, Obama should have allowed the tax cuts to expire, so we could already be paying this off. That is essential - that we regain that revenue stream.

That is the threat to our grandchildren. Blaming it on "Obama spending!" is simply false.

you showed one person's data and not the true cost of the stimulus package.

I don't have time to debate the entire budget with someone like you, but I will give you one thing. You stated that Obama cut Defense spending

The Department of Defense once again has the lion’s share of the discretionary federal budget, with an increase of about $8.2 billion over the 2010 Federal Budget in order to address ongoing military strategy, purchase weapons and take care of US Military. $548.9 billion is for the Department of Defense’s baseline budget, an additional $159.3 billion going to funding operations in Iraq, Afganistan and Pakistan, and an additional $33 billion for 2010 to supplement current mission requirement. The DOD is also setting a 2012 goal to create Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record (VLER), which is an agency that will create a more effective way to share health information for military. Major Department of Defense ExpendituresMilitary Operations


I guess to you a $8.2 Billion increase is a decrease in spending

is good old Spin Doctor Beth back at it again today?

Amazes me how it is ok for Obama without Congressional approval to be doing what we are in Libya which originally was supposed to be an overnight air strike and take days, but we are now I believe 60+ days in with no signs of a resolution. Bush may have gotten us into a bad unfunded war, but at least he got congressional approval

That is the independent Congressional Budget Offices' data. Not "one person". "The" people, who know every dime, and where it goes. The ones that tell Congress the impact of their fiscal policies.

It is precisely the true cost of the stimulus, and the effect over time. If you have different data, feel free to post it.

And yes, Obama cut $50 billion from Defense Spending over 10 years (actually the Defense Dept did) - again, your quoting of base figures means you are attributing all spending to Obama, which is simply false.

Yeah they'd never fudge the numbers. :D

Not true. This is based on an analysis by the cbpp.org of the Congressional Budget Offices. Anybody can analyze data and say what they want, but nice try.