Change We Can Believe In: $9.3 TRILLION In Deficits

There comes a point where a sane human being says, “Enough.”

Unfortunately, the President of the United States, the substantial Democrat majorities in the House and Senate, and the 52% of the American electorate who voted for Obama aren’t sane.  From the AP:

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama‘s budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, more than four times the deficits of Republican George W. Bush’s presidency, congressional auditors said Friday.

The new Congressional Budget Office figures offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It’s a prospect even the president’s own budget director called unsustainable.

In his White House run, Obama assailed the economic policies of his predecessor, but the eye-popping deficit numbers threaten to swamp his ambitious agenda of overhauling health care, exploring new energy sources and enacting scores of domestic programs.

The dismal deficit figures, if they prove to be accurate, inevitably raise the prospect that Obama and his Democratic allies controlling Congress would have to consider raising taxes after the recession ends or else pare back his agenda.

By CBO’s calculation, Obama’s budget would generate deficits averaging almost $1 trillion a year of red ink over 2010-2019.

Worst of all, CBO says the deficit under Obama’s policies would never go below 4 percent of the size of the economy, figures that economists agree are unsustainable. By the end of the decade, the deficit would exceed 5 percent of gross domestic product, a dangerously high level.

First of all, may ever Democrat who ever damned Bush over his spending burn in hell for four times eternity.

Obama demagogued his way to power by demonizing Bush.  He continues to divert attention away from the failure of his presidency to assert confidence in the market by demonizing Bush.  But the secret is trickling out: Obama is to the economy what cancer is to the body.  George Bush had 9/11, two wars, and Hurricane Katrina to deal with – and Barack Obama’s budget is STILL four times worse than his.  That is crazy on Barry Bond’s steroids.

Forbes offers this:

WASHINGTON, D.C.–As President Obama prepares to send his budget to Congress next week, he’s run into a bit of a stumbling block. The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that the national debt under the president’s budget will be $2.3 trillion deeper than the White House estimates.

Now for the real bad news: Both estimates are optimistic. If the economy continues to deteriorate faster than economists project, those numbers will balloon further.

It is fair to ask: is an administration that underestimates its own budget to this extent competent?  I know that Turbo Tax Tim Geithner is virtually alone at Treasury (given the fact that dozens of Treasury positions, including 17 of the top 18 positions, remain unfilled while Obama practices his bowling and yucks it up on late night TV); but getting it wrong by $2.3 TRILLION?

I think of the Treasury Department, and I see this elf-eared little man frantically pushing buttons at random.

Basically, the Obama budget plan is entirely based on the Annie song, “The sun will come out tomorrow.”  It continues the worst kind of insanity of the state budgets that project nothing but blue skies for the future and spend accordingly; and then when hard times come they face crises of historic proportions.  Just look at the black hole California dug for itself.

Obama’s answer for being in an economic black hole is, “Dig faster.”  It’s “Let’s encourage all Americans to dig.  If every American were to start digging like crazy, we could turn this black hole into a Cotton Candy Mountain.”

Obama is spending this country into the stratosphere.  And what comes up necessarily must come down.  And, given that we have to pay all these trillions of dollars back, how is he planning to increase revenues?  By raising taxes.

Wrong.  WRONG! You increase revenues by lowering taxes.

Even the New York Times (“Sharp Rise in Tax Revenue to Pare U.S. Deficit” on July 13, 2005 by Edmund L. Andrews) was forced to acknowledge that the Bush tax cuts had substantially raised revenues:

WASHINGTON, July 12 – For the first time since President Bush took office, an unexpected leap in tax revenue is about to shrink the federal budget deficit this year, by nearly $100 billion.

A Jump in Corporate Payments On Wednesday, White House officials plan to announce that the deficit for the 2005 fiscal year, which ends in September, will be far smaller than the $427 billion they estimated in February.

Mr. Bush plans to hail the improvement at a cabinet meeting and to cite it as validation of his argument that tax cuts would stimulate the economy and ultimately help pay for themselves.

Based on revenue and spending data through June, the budget deficit for the first nine months of the fiscal year was $251 billion, $76 billion lower than the $327 billion gap recorded at the corresponding point a year earlier.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated last week that the deficit for the full fiscal year, which reached $412 billion in 2004, could be “significantly less than $350 billion, perhaps below $325 billion.”

The big surprise has been in tax revenue, which is running nearly 15 percent higher than in 2004. Corporate tax revenue has soared about 40 percent, after languishing for four years, and individual tax revenue is up as well.

Now compare that to the previously alluded to Wall Street Journal article (“Inconvenient Tax Truths” from October 30, 2007) as to what would start happening if Democrats gained power:

On the other hand, the 2008 elections could lead to a very different outcome, for the Rangel bill shows in which direction tax policy will proceed if there is a Democratic president and Congress in 2009.

On that note, Chief Executive Magazine had a poll offering some predictions for what would happen to the economy if Obama won:

Chief Executive Magazine’s most recent polling of 751 CEOs shows that GOP presidential candidate John McCain is the preferred choice for CEOs. According to the poll, which is featured on the cover of Chief Executive’s most recent issue, by a four-to-one margin, CEOs support Senator John McCain over Senator Barack Obama. Moreover, 74 percent of the executives say they fear that an Obama presidency would be disastrous for the country…..

In expressing their rejection of Senator Obama, some CEOs who responded to the survey went as far as to say that “some of his programs would bankrupt the country within three years, if implemented.” In fact, the poll highlights that Obama’s tax policies, which scored the lowest grade in the poll, are particularly unpopular among CEOs.

And now here we are, with our economy gowing down the drain due to lack of investor confidence in Obama’s policies – which head this country in exactly the wrong direction – and literally facing bankruptcy due to an Obama budget that is simply out of control.

Is it any wonder – given what is going on right now – that Trends Research Institute CEO Gerald Celente Predicts Revolution, Food Riots, Tax Rebellions By 2012?

We’ve got “tea party” rallies (which the media is hypocritically ignoring) and citizens mailing tea bags to their elected leaders.  We’ve got people demonstrating with pitchforks.

We’ve got a fiery Thomas Paine getting big hits on Youtube by pointing out just how absolutely disconnected our elected officials are to the people and the needs of the country:

But the question remains: what are we going to do as our nation flows down the drain at a dizzying rate?  What are you going to do?