PDA

View Full Version : CBO Estimates US Budget Deficit of $390 Billion



red states rule
01-11-2010, 06:16 AM
This report came out on Thursday and I did not here about this on MSNBC, CNN - and nothing in the Washington Post or NY Times

Funny, I remember the liberal media all over deficits when Bush was in charge - now you can hear a pin drop with Obama in charge

Of course, the Dems will contnue to push their style of fiscal responsibility by passing Obamacare which will only make the deficit grow and grow




CBO Estimates a Federal Budget Deficit of $390 Billion for First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2010

The federal budget deficit was about $390 billion in the first quarter of fiscal year 2010, CBO estimates in its latest Monthly Budget Review—$56 billion more than for the same period in fiscal year 2009 despite reduced spending related to turmoil in the financial markets. Outlays were slightly lower than they were last year at this time, but revenues have fallen by about 11 percent. Later this month, CBO will issue new budget projections for 2010 and the following 10 years.

December 2009 marks the second consecutive December that the federal budget will record a deficit, CBO estimates. Typically, December yields a budget surplus because most corporations make quarterly income tax payments and withholding for individuals is relatively high because of year-end bonuses and seasonal employment. The deficit in December was $92 billion, CBO estimates, about $40 billion more than the deficit recorded in December 2008. Adjusted to eliminate variation attributable to shifts in the timing of certain payments, the deficit was about $11 billion greater than it was the same month last year.

Outlays

Spending in the first quarter was slightly less this year than it was last year, but after adjustments for shifts in the timing of certain payments, the decline was greater—about $32 billion (or 4 percent). Spending for the Troubled Asset Relief Program decreased by $85 billion, and net spending by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) was $45 billion lower because of greater net receipts. (In order to replenish the Deposit Insurance Fund, the FDIC required banks and thrift institutions to prepay insurance premiums that would otherwise be due over the next three years.) Without the timing shifts and the large reductions in spending in those two areas, first quarter spending would be up by $98 billion (or 13 percent) compared with outlays a year ago.

Spending for unemployment benefits more than doubled from the first quarter last year, rising by $22 billion, because of high unemployment and extensions in the duration of benefits. Medicaid spending in the first quarter was up $14 billion (or 25 percent), nearly $10 billion of which is attributable to a provision in the economic stimulus legislation that temporarily increased federal payments to states under Medicaid. Spending for other stimulus programs also contributed to increased spending in December. In addition, adjusted for timing shifts, Social Security benefits were up by $16 billion (or 10 percent) and Medicare spending was up by $8 billion (or 8 percent).

Revenues

CBO estimates that, in the first quarter of the fiscal year, revenues were about $59 billion (or 11 percent) lower than receipts in the same period a year ago. Individual income and payroll taxes combined fell by about $53 billion (or 12 percent): Withholding was $40 billion (or 9 percent) lower, refunds were $10 billion higher, and nonwithheld receipts were $3 billion (or 11 percent) lower. The weakness in withholding stems from the effects of recent legislation and weakness in wages and salaries.

Net corporate income taxes declined by about $15 billion (or 30 percent) compared with receipts during the same period last year because of a combination of higher refunds and lower payments of estimated taxes. The decline in net corporate receipts can be attributed to weak corporate profits and the effects of recent legislation that extended the period over which corporations could apply current-year losses to offset income in previous years.

http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=449

red states rule
01-12-2010, 06:09 AM
OK, the Dems are spending all this money - and what are we getting for it

Well, as most of you know first hand - NOTHING

Will the left now say the AP is not a "real" news source now?






STIMULUS WATCH: Unemployment Unchanged by Projects

A federal spending surge of more than $20 billion for roads and bridges in President Barack Obama's first stimulus has had no effect on local unemployment rates, raising questions about his argument for billions more to address an "urgent need to accelerate job growth."

An Associated Press analysis of stimulus spending found that it didn't matter if a lot of money was spent on highways or none at all: Local unemployment rates rose and fell regardless. And the stimulus spending only barely helped the beleaguered construction industry, the analysis showed.

With the nation's unemployment rate at 10 percent and expected to rise, Obama wants a second stimulus bill from Congress including billions of additional dollars for roads and bridges — projects the president says are "at the heart of our effort to accelerate job growth."

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood defended the administration's recovery program Monday, writing on his blog that "DOT-administered stimulus spending is the only thing propping up the transportation construction industry."

Road spending would total nearly $28 billion of the Jobs for Main Street Act, a $75 billion second stimulus to help lower the unemployment rate and improve the dismal job market for construction workers. The Senate is expected to consider the House-approved bill this month.

But AP's analysis, which was reviewed by independent economists at five universities, showed the strategy of pumping transportation money into counties hasn't affected local unemployment rates so far.

"There seems to me to be very little evidence that it's making a difference," said Todd Steen, an economics professor at Hope College in Michigan who reviewed the AP analysis.

And there's concern about relying on transportation spending a second time.

"My bottom line is, I'd be skeptical about putting too much more money into a second stimulus until we've seen broader effects from the first stimulus," said Aaron Jackson, a Bentley University economist who also reviewed AP's analysis.

for the complete article

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9527995