Obama budget cuts have little deficit impact

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by drjekyllus, May 7, 2009.

  1. By Richard Cowan and Jeff Mason - Analysis

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama's budget suggests $17 billion in spending cuts for fiscal year 2010, but Congress already has rejected some of those proposals and the savings do little to dent a projected $1.17 trillion deficit.

    Obama on Thursday released details of the spending cuts, most of which were announced during or after the initial roll-out of his $3.5 trillion budget in February. Fiscal year 2010 begins on October 1.

    Here is a look at what some of the cuts mean for deficit reduction and the chances they have of getting approval from lawmakers:

    * Obama's budget calls for controversial healthcare reforms and legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global warming, but a huge fight is already underway in Congress over both initiatives.

    Republicans largely oppose a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, calling it a disguised energy tax, and some Democrats are wary of the system's effect on the economy. Obama wants to help fight climate change by capping emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, or CO2, from big industries and allowing them to trade rights to pollute. Such systems are known as "cap and trade."

    * Congress already has rejected Obama's proposed subsidy cuts for wealthy farmers.

    * The $17 billion in proposed savings are easily lost in just the interest payments on a federal government debt that is now more than $11.2 trillion. Those interest payments are totaling hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

    * Obama's cuts would be far eclipsed by the more than $94 billion in new "emergency" spending to continue paying for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars this year and to increase foreign aid and battle a possible pandemic flu.

    * The U.S. budget deficit picture is worsened by the economic recession that has resulted in lower government tax receipts and huge increases in spending to try to stimulate the economy. Until a turnaround occurs, deficits are expected to continue at historically high levels.

    * Budget experts believe that the only way to get deficits under control long-term is by making significant reforms to federal retirement and healthcare programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

    * The details of Obama's requests come about a week after lawmakers wrapped up work on the very budget the president is now proposing. The Democratic-controlled Congress has passed a nonbinding $3.4 trillion budget plan for next year that embraces many of Obama's priorities.
     
  2. What a Joke.
    For Obama to call any cuts "savings" is an insult to basic intelligence.
     
  3. Yawn.
     
  4. one- half of 1 percent!

    Obama needs a helmet.
     
  5. The Department of Education has a permanent representative based in Paris, France to the tune of $632,000 per year . . . but I guess all of the Bush lovers never had a problem with this. :D
     
  6. And Obama's porky stimulus bill is spending between $200,000-$600,000 per every job it creates.
     
  7. Really now???

    Please feel free to provide a link to credible documentation that supports your claim of above.

    And do us all a favor and avoid anything from that "fair and balanced" bastion of objective journalism, Faux News.

    I seriously doubt you can . . . But keep on posting your worthless Glenn Beck garbage. It makes you look most "intelligent". :D
     

  8. This is coming from the guy who cites Olbermann.
     
  9. I'm, amazed at the posters who parrot faux news And rush the leader of the republican party.

    For example we have this from faux newsman Hannity:

    "SUMMARY: Sean Hannity asserted that the economic stimulus bill would amount to spending at least $217,000 for every job created, echoing a false calculation from a press release issued by the Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee and repeated by numerous media figures. In fact, by calculating the per-job cost by dividing the estimated total cost of the stimulus package by the estimated number of jobs created -- and thus suggesting that the sole purpose of that package is to create jobs -- these media figures ignored other tangible benefits stemming from the package, such as infrastructure improvements and education, health, and public safety investments."
    http://mediamatters.org/research/200901270012

    I don't know why Obama proposed the cuts but it brings forth the true colors of both parties and that is they all rail against deficits but when push comes to shove they want the status quo and no cuts either meaningfull or trivial.

    Vote em all out come next election as the clowns in both parties don't deserve to hold an office if they can't even agree on token cuts.


    Seneca
     
  10. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    One must consider that the sheeple Obama is primarily speaking to, don't have a lot of intelligence.

    The "cuts" are strictly for show/political mileage. In real terms they mean virtually nothing. If Hussein was serious about reducing the deficit and government waste he would not have signed the pork laden "stimulus" package.
     
    #10     May 9, 2009