Investing in Precious Metals 101 Ad

Federal Budget Deficit

Login or register to post comments Last Post 3002 reads   6 posts
  • Thu, Jan 08, 2009 - 01:46pm

    #1
    csstudent

    csstudent

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Dec 22 2008

    Posts: 24

    count placeholder

    Federal Budget Deficit

I’d like to ask a question about the US federal budget deficit.  I’m posting it in this section because I think it’s an example of making a number appear not as bad as it really is.

I’ve read in a lot of news articles recently about the possibility of a 1.2 trillion dollar fiscal year 2009 projected deficit.  These articles typically mention that fiscal year 2008 deficits were 455 billion.  Here’s one example: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aECC6Y15OhwQ&refer=home

However, when I look at the actual values for fiscal year 2008, it is just under a trillion dollars(what’s a few billion between friends anyway??).  The government’s fiscal year 2008 ran from October 1, 2007 until September 30, 2008.  You can look at the actual numbers here: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np .

How did they come up with the 455 billion dollar figure when the numbers that they actually post are more than twice that figure?

Thanks. 

  • Thu, Jan 08, 2009 - 05:29pm

    #2
    mpelchat

    mpelchat

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 10 2008

    Posts: 40

    count placeholder

    Re: Federal Budget Deficit

Try 3 times the figure, looking at the Treasury data on date 12/31/2008 and subtract from the number on 1/1/2008 our debt grew $1.489 trillion

 $1.489 trillion

These guys are either so "@#$%^" unintelligent that they do not know what information is available to the public -or- more likely, these guys beleive we are so unintelligent not to check what they are telling us.

 

 

  • Thu, Jan 08, 2009 - 05:55pm

    #3

    mainecooncat

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 08 2008

    Posts: 155

    count placeholder

    Re: Federal Budget Deficit

[quote=mpelchat]

These guys are either so "@#$%^" unintelligent that they do not know what information is available to the public -or- more likely, these guys beleive we are so unintelligent not to check what they are telling us.

[/quote]

How about both? But you forgot a third option as well. An arrogance so unbridled and absolute as to render reality moot. Lying through our teeth to the public, doesn’t matter. They can’t do anything anyway.

  • Fri, Jan 09, 2009 - 12:20pm

    #4
    mpelchat

    mpelchat

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 10 2008

    Posts: 40

    count placeholder

    Re: Federal Budget Deficit

Well put. I just get this horrid feeling they take these times to get their own selves and there friends in the best positions while putting us in a worse one. rich get richer, poor get poorer.

  • Mon, Feb 16, 2009 - 12:58pm

    #5
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1613

    count placeholder

    Re: Federal Budget Deficit

I think I figured out the reason for the discrepancy between what was published and the numbers from the Treasury Department’s web site.

I was reading this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457407865686565.html and the following paragraph caught my attention:

"Officials say the budget blueprint to be released this month will also attempt to make public the full extent of the dire fiscal situation, by not repeating some of the accounting used in crafting President George W. Bush’s budgets. Recent budget blueprints excluded from deficit projections the long-term costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those budgets also didn’t include the cost of preventing the alternative minimum tax — instituted in 1969 to ensure the rich didn’t escape taxation — from hitting the middle class."

If you exclude the cost of wars and assumed you’d collect the AMT instead of passing yearly patches for it then I could see the discrepancies between the two sets of numbers.  I’m not an accountant, but it seems like this is very Enron-like though. 

  • Fri, Mar 11, 2011 - 02:11am

    #6
    SPAM_amy001

    SPAM_amy001

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 10 2011

    Posts: 3

    count placeholder

     NowThe Office DVD the

 

NowThe Office DVD the network only shows I think are the ‘Agency “and” 30 Rock. ” What makes the “office” is unique throughout the regular band. Most comedy shows provide a maximum of six actors to appear regularly supports a number of recurring characters. But the whole is the “Office”The Tribe DVDis composed of at least ten-developed characters that are ninety percent of the episodes.The authors do a great job of integrating this large cast comedy show always fun and exhilarating. And even if it is not fully compliant with Seinfeld “No hugs, no lessons learned” rule, it is difficult[Scrubs DVD to ever trust the romantic moments of cheese (think “Friends of manipulating the public.This show was adapted from a British comedy of the same name. I loved the English version. But since the show was scripted to have two through six episodes each (plus a special, extended tied all the loose ends), the director, played by Ricky Gervais, brilliantly, couldPrison Break DVDbe much more than the rough equivalent, Michael Scott , starring Steve Carrell’s character, the American version. Michael Scott is also a rude, and Steve Carrell brings just the right among the smarm inhabit this role. In short, this is a well constructed, well writtenTwo And A Half Men DVDshows, like in real life, a large number of other actors. Funny and intelligent, has not yet reached the pantheon of the sitcom classic. But chances are good that the wind out there. This DVD is the season, “second” (in fact, the first full season) makes it clear why.

———————

Buy Cheap DVD

The Office DVD

 

 

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

Login or Register to post comments