NY Times Blames The Deficit On……..

….if the first thought that came to mind was “enormous and reckless spending by Obama and the Democrats,” well, sorry, nope, uh uh, you have to go back to the B and T words

With President Obama and Republican leaders calling for cutting the budget by trillions over the next 10 years, it is worth asking how we got here — from healthy surpluses at the end of the Clinton era, and the promise of future surpluses, to nine straight years of deficits, including the $1.3 trillion shortfall in 2010. The answer is largely the Bush-era tax cuts, war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, and recessions.

Got that? Obama and the Democrats spending bears absolutely no responsibility for going from a slightly more than a $400 billion deficit (who controlled Congress and the power of the purse strings since January 2007?) to that $1.3 billion in 2010 (who was President and which party controlled congress in 2010?)

The first graph shows the difference between budget projections and budget reality. In 2001, President George W. Bush inherited a surplus, with projections by the Congressional Budget Office for ever-increasing surpluses, assuming continuation of the good economy and President Bill Clinton’s policies. But every year starting in 2002, the budget fell into deficit. In January 2009, just before President Obama took office, the budget office projected a $1.2 trillion deficit for 2009 and deficits in subsequent years, based on continuing Mr. Bush’s policies and the effects of recession. Mr. Obama’s policies in 2009 and 2010, including the stimulus package, added to the deficits in those years but are largely temporary.

See? It really isn’t His Fault. His are only “temporary.”

A few lessons can be drawn from the numbers. First, the Bush tax cuts have had a huge damaging effect. If all of them expired as scheduled at the end of 2012, future deficits would be cut by about half, to sustainable levels. Second, a healthy budget requires a healthy economy; recessions wreak havoc by reducing tax revenue. Government has to spur demand and create jobs in a deep downturn, even though doing so worsens the deficit in the short run. Third, spending cuts alone will not close the gap. The chronic revenue shortfalls from serial tax cuts are simply too deep to fill with spending cuts alone. Taxes have to go up.

So, what lessons can we draw from the unhinged progressive moonbat NY Times position? First, they love tax increases, but refuse to pony up and pay more themselves. Second, they still think, after 10 years, that we are still cutting taxes, rather than dealing with the same rates. Third, they still do not understand that people tend to spend more when they are “allowed” by Big Daddy Government to keep more of their own money, meaning more revenues for the States, making them more solvent, and more people tend to work, meaning they pay income tax (obviously, this is a very simplistic look at the issue). Fourth, they’ll never cut anything except the military: they just want Other People to pay more taxes so they can spend more.

Then she goes on to, surely unintentionally, tell a truth

In future decades, when rising health costs with an aging population hit the budget in full force, deficits are projected to be far deeper than they are now. Effective health care reform, and a willingness to pay more taxes, will be the biggest factors in controlling those deficits.

So, Obamacare wasn’t “effective health care reform”? I’m shocked. I thought it was supposed to bend the curve downward and solve all our problems.

Anyhow, in Liberal World, nothing is the fault of the Democrats and Obama: just Bush and not taxing people enough. Notice that the writer, Teresa Trich, never once says that taxes should only go up on “the rich.” That’s because the left wants taxes to go up on everyone.

Speaker Boehner is said to be ready to offer a new GOP plan. I implore him to include a measure that would create a two tiered tax system, where people can voluntarily pay the 2000 tax rates. Let’s see if Democrats put their money where their mouths are.

Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

3 Responses to “NY Times Blames The Deficit On……..”

  1. This is confusing- I thought it was Reagan’s tax cuts that were responsible for Obama’s debt? Didn’t Harding cut taxes to (and end a recession)- can’t the Democrats blame him?

    Does anyone else other than me now look back fondly on those awful Bush debts of 300-500 billion during a growing economy?

  2. It was actually, I believe, the extraordinarily low taxes under George Washington that started it all.

Pirate's Cove