advertisement

The world-famous Internet site of the Nationally Syndicated Neal Boortz Show!

Search Boortz.com
Enter search terms:
Browse Boortz.com
Today's Nuze

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."

Frederic Bastiat

THE COST OF OBAMA

By
Neal Boortz
@ March 8, 2010 9:01 AM Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBacks (0)

There is one thing that Democrats, Republicans and Independents can all agree on - the debt we owe is our greatest long-term threat to national security. By a two-to-one margin, Americans of all demographics and political parties believe that the amount of money we owe to China is now a greater long-term threat than radical Islam. They're right, but it's must worse than that. The level of debt facing this country will destroy the dreams of our children and grandchildren. It is hard to imagine that future generations will have the opportunity to pursue anything close to the lifestyle we enjoy as they are faced with this crushing debt to retire.

Just how bad is this problem? Read on .....

Last Friday, the Congressional Budget office released a report stating that our projected debt is actually going to be much higher than the White House predicted. Wow! Now who didn't see THAT coming? The CBO says that Obama's budget is going to lead to annual deficits averaging $1 trillion for the next decade. The White House's prediction was an annual budget shortfall of $853 billion for the next decade. Why the discrepancy? Obama expects to bring in more tax revenue. The CBO, on the other hand, does not believe the Obama economy will be able to generate the tax revenue because it expects less economic growth. In fact, the CBO predicts that the deficit will never fall below 4% of the GDP under Obama's policies and "would begin to grow rapidly after 2015."

(By the way, as of right now our predicted annual deficit for this year is $1.5 trillion - a post WWII record at 10.3% of our economy.)

But back to this report ... the CBO says that deficits of that magnitude would force the Treasury to continue borrowing at prodigious rates, sending the national debt soaring to 90% of the economy by 2020, while interest payments on the debt would also skyrocket by $800 billion over the same period.

Speaking of interest rates, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell puts our interest rates into perspective. He says, " ... in just four years the administration predicts the government will have to spend more just to pay interest on the federal debt than it spends on the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, HUD (Housing and Urban Development), Interior, Justice, Labor, State, Treasury, and the Corps of Engineers, Environment Protection Agency, GSA (General Services Administration), NASA, National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration and the Social Security Administration -- combined."

Categories:

Tags:

Main Index | Archives | RSS feed

0 TrackBacks

Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: THE COST OF OBAMA.

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/64645

Jamie Dupree's Blog

If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.

Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!

Avg. rating: N/A

What others are saying

  • Re: @ACE I understand what you're saying – but the Far-left National Socialist Democrats are great inspiration for trashing their failed ideology.
    And beside, I love calling them Far-left National Socialist Democrats, it really frames who they are and what they believe.
    By ACE @ 03/09/10 10:38:46 AMreport abuse
  • Libertarians have cared about the deficit
    Hey all you Obama supporters out there.
    I have two questions for you.
    1) How's that "Hope" and "Change" working for you?
    2) Are you ready for the day when your kids and grandkids curse you for voting for Obama?
    By Libertarian Voter @ 03/09/10 08:25:50 AMreport abuse
  • Tax Cut vs. Tax Credit
    At the risk of feeding the trolls, there is a real difference between a Tax Credit and a Tax Cut. One causes a tax payer to keep more of his money. The other gives more of the tax payers money to someone who most likely doesn't pay any taxes to begin with. I leave it to the reader to figure out which is which.
    By Rob @ 03/08/10 04:46:53 PMreport abuse
  • @ACE
    "And of course it doesn't really mean anything when the Conservatives win – just like the recent wins."

    um, er, well.. have you uh, perhaps noticed why Scott Brown opposed healthcare reform? See:his state already has mandated, universal healthcare.
    By laughable @ 03/08/10 04:09:46 PMreport abuse
  • Liberal stooge
    The liberal talking point stooge a.k.a. "laughable" can't seem to conjure up anything other than smoke, mirrors and the usual DNC talking points. If I were you, I wouldn't waste my time lowering myself to his level.
    By @ACE @ 03/08/10 04:04:33 PMreport abuse
  • Far-left National Socialists like to say things like “elections matter” because with their typical double standards it means one thing when they win, and entirely something else when conservatives win.
    When they win the phrase means: “Hey! we won, you lost, we get to put in place programs that will keep us in power forever”.

    It means they think that the country has suddenly embraced Socialism, and by gum, by golly they are going to implement as much of it as they can before people get wind of what they really mean by “Hopenchange”.

    And of course it doesn't really mean anything when the Conservatives win – just like the recent wins.

    It can't possibly be a rejection of Socialism – no, in those cases it's simply because the Communist organizer hasn't 'Splained it well enough (for the 4,287th time).
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 03:53:19 PMreport abuse
  • @gxm
    All good suggestions, but if you open up a CON-CON you are going to get every nutcase in the country in there trying to get their ideas instituted too.

    Also, if you got 100% of your suggestions in the new Constitution, what makes you think these sleazebags are going to honor them?
    By esorcire @ 03/08/10 03:11:01 PMreport abuse
  • Interest payments to China is meaningless
    As long as we try to be gentlemen about it we may honor our committments. But to be a gentleman in a world of thieves and mooches is to be stupid and weak.

    When it gets too onerous, poof, the America that incurred those obligations, the debt you're so worried about, is gone. Hands washed. Declare bankruptcy. A new "America v. 2.0" emerges, and it owes nothing to anyone.

    The financial system is meaningless. It's concepts of numbers and value. Nothing more.

    What the flip is China going to do with a handful of paper? Come repossess our cars and homes and iPods? Invade?

    I for one would LOVE if they stopped lending us money. I for one would LOVE for America to live within it's freaking means.

    But since it can't, since it's just another "ME ME ME ME ME" entity like most the rest of America (100% of the "strong" and "powerful", Hey, Trump, reading this?) they'll borrow until someone laughs and sends them packing. So, off to the next step and declare bankruptcy like all the "rich" do. (I.e. Trump.)

    The debt is unrealistically *bad*. Sure. UNREALISTIC is the key term. It's meaningless.

    What does it matter what it is?

    Where's the Wiemar Republic today?
    By John @ 03/08/10 02:58:55 PMreport abuse
  • @gxm
    LOL!

    yes, and everyone gets free beer!

    about as plausible.
    By laughable @ 03/08/10 02:53:56 PMreport abuse
  • Constitutional Convention
    At this point in the game we cannot escape without serious economic hardship. But if we were to pass the following amendments to the Constitution either initiated in the Congress or in a constitutional convention we could be on the road to economic recovery in 2 years and in pretty good shape in 5. If we don’t then it is onward to an inflationary depression a la the Weimar Republic. The middle class will be utterly ruined.

    1.A balanced budget Amendment with real teeth like the one from Representatives Jeb Hensarling of Texas , Mike Pence of Indiana and John Campbell of California.

    2.Repeal of the 16th Amendment that also makes plain that only consumption taxes like the FairTax are henceforth permitted cutting off the massive money pipeline that politicians use to punish enemies and reward friends and of course reward themselves.

    3.An original language or original intent amendment that makes clear that the bogus and sophistic "living document"/ "general welfare" concept is henceforth banished from Amreican jurisprudence.

    4.An amendment that either abolishes the Fed or at the very least backs the dollar with precious metals so that out of control money creation is stopped.
    By gxm @ 03/08/10 02:30:07 PMreport abuse
  • Schumer & Graham = 2 rodents
    MPercy -- Yes isn't that just great then they can file tax returns and claim child tax credits and the EIC and get a refund. Then vote for bigger goverment.
    By Blue Eyed Devil @ 03/08/10 02:12:28 PMreport abuse
  • Barry the Bolshevik's solution to out of control spending on bloated and wasteful wealth redistribution programs is the ADD another bloated and wasteful wealth redistribution program on top in the form of Obamacare.
    To quote a Guinness commercial of the past few years:

    'BRIILLANT!!!!!'

    What better way to crash the economy than to do more of the same that has the economy teetering on the brink of disaster.

    Of course, the far-Left National Socialist Democrats don't seem to have any answers to how people are going to be helped when the whole system comes crashing down, but that doesn't matter to them – only the attainment of power.
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 02:10:23 PMreport abuse
  • In the Alice in wonderland world of the Far-left National Socialist, the money you earn actually belongs to the government, and when they let you keep some of it, they consider it a cost to them.
    This is how Far-left National Socialists look at the economy.

    They completely ignore the simple truth that when you punish people for earning a living by forcibly taking it at the point of a gun, you discourage people from earning a living.

    They somehow think that people are like mindless ATM's that they can rob at will without any economic repercussions.
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 01:56:48 PMreport abuse
  • Gridlock
    The AJC column I pasted provides a few lessons:
    • Spending is far more of a problem than the tax cuts (e.g. 2009 actual vs. predicted $826 billion more spending vs $363 billion less tax revenue)
    o Congress needs to stop spending
    • The state of the economy in general is the biggest factor (or duh, tax revenue flow in good economies)
    o Congress needs to stop doing things that screw up the economy
    • If Congress had done nothing over the last 10 years, we’d be just fine
    o Congress needs to stop doing things, period
    Gridlock, for lack of a better word, is good.
    By MPercy @ 03/08/10 01:53:09 PMreport abuse
  • @ACE
    look, you and I both know (at least, I hope) that the problem here is mandatory spending. and THE primary drivers for those are medicare, medicaid, and social security. And the drivers there are aging boomers and healthcare costs.

    What stinks, and Obama has been right to highlight, is that the GOP has backed itself into a corner in terms of being able to reasonably negotiate to bring these programs to some sort of fiscal sanity.

    boortz is right - elections matter. and if you think you're gonna win any with Ryan's budget - go ahead and try.

    and when you're done bashing your head against that wall, how's about we all come together to really talk about things we can agree on to fix these programs (things OTHER than a "medicare bill of rights, thx mr steele)?

    you rage at all our perils.
    By laughable @ 03/08/10 01:47:49 PMreport abuse
  • MPercy
    It's not just Obama, Ds and Rs in Congress plus Bush hurt us over the last 10 years, but Obama and this Congress seem intent on revving the engine of destruction well past the red-line.

    Look at this column in the AJC recently:
    http://www.ajc.com/opinion/deficit-math-still-eludes-348284.html

    As President Barack Obama’s new budget commission begins its search for answers to the difficult fiscal challenges facing the nation, it must reverse the usual desire in Washington to solve every problem by spending more and taxing less without regard to how it all adds up.

    Consider what has happened over the last decade. In January 2001, Congress had a very nice “problem” on its hands: what to do with a projected 10-year budget surplus of $5.6 trillion. At that time, the projected surplus for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2009 was a mind-boggling $710 billion.

    In fact, it was projected that by 2009 the entire debt held by the public would be essentially paid off. Serious analysts even worried that the government might start buying private-sector assets with all the extra money.

    Things didn’t exactly work out that way. The actual number for 2009 was a deficit of $1.4 trillion. And the cumulative total over the same 10-year period (ending in 2011) is now a projected deficit of $5.9 trillion.

    Concerns about paying off the debt too fast are as remote as concerns that Columbus would sail off the face of the Earth.

    What happened to flip the 2001 projection by $11.5 trillion in the wrong direction? Plenty.

    For one thing, the economy did not turn out to be as buoyant as assumed.

    According to Congressional Budget Office estimates, economic and technical factors reduced the 10-year surplus by $3.5 trillion.

    That change, however, would still have left a 10-year surplus of $2.1 trillion and — remarkably — a deficit of just $1 billion last year.

    What happened to the rest of the projected surplus? Congress spent some of it and gave the rest away in tax cuts.

    In 2009, for example, Congress spent $826 billion more on programs than had been projected in 2001. Taxes were cut by $363 billion. Additional debt service stemming from these legislated changes cost $225 billion. That comes to a negative impact of $1.4 trillion.

    In other words, the $1.4 trillion deficit in 2009 can be entirely attributed to the $1.4 trillion of legislation enacted by Congress since January 2001. If they had just gone home and not come back, the 2009 budget would have been balanced.
    By anonymous @ 03/08/10 01:46:20 PMreport abuse
  • New data point will cost $$$$
    You may have missed Friday's news about how Mr. President has sent Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham off to revive the comprehensive immigration reform that will "provide a path to citizenship" for those "otherwise law-abiding undocumented workers". I love that phrase "otherwise law-abiding undocumented workers".

    See, once they have received their amnesty and are citizens, then Joe Wilson will have been wrong--because they will not be illegal aliens anymore. Instead, they will be eligible for all Obamacare benefits, but their numbers will not have been included in the CBO scoring of the bill because the bill supposedly disallows payments in support of illegal aliens.
    By MPercy @ 03/08/10 01:34:53 PMreport abuse
  • The politicians' favorite response to every problem:
    Throw money at it ...

    ... somebody else's money.
    By Jubilation T Cornpone @ 03/08/10 01:32:35 PMreport abuse
  • Whoever claims the right to redistribute the wealth produced by others is claiming the right to treat human beings as chattel. - Ayn Rand
    ..
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 01:27:43 PMreport abuse
  • @AR15
    refundable here refers to things like child tax credits and the EIC.
    By laughable @ 03/08/10 01:10:40 PMreport abuse
  • Hard to believe the Washington Post would put a negative spin on tax cuts. /sarc.
    From the article:

    “President Obama's proposed budget would add more than $9.7 trillion to the national debt over the next decade, congressional budget analysts said Friday. Proposed tax cuts for the middle class account for nearly a third of that shortfall. “

    Forget about all the spending – focus on the fact that people may be keeping more of what they have earned.

    After all, the travesty of people keeping their hard earned money means that the Far-left National Socialists can't use it to buy votes – they can't abide that, after all one more dollar in Your pocket means one less dollar they could use to buy the loyalty of an Obamabot.

    ( Of course, that wouldn't be a whole dollar they would be using to buy that loyalty, the Far-left National Socialists have overhead and other costs don't ya know – the Obamabots only get what's left over, the change out of that dollar – at least they “Hope” they'll get some of that “Change”, but you never know)
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 01:03:19 PMreport abuse
  • Greg
    if you think those are the only definitions of each type of society then you really need to hit the books.
    By Butters @ 03/08/10 12:43:00 PMreport abuse
  • Why are those tax credits refundable and not non-refundable
    Since Laughable is so proud of Obama's tax cuts, I'm just wondering why the one's he mentioned are refundable and not non-refundable?
    By AR15 @ 03/08/10 12:12:44 PMreport abuse
  • What is our society?
    This is in reply to Butters, we are supposed to be living in Capitalism.

    If private citizens are allowed to own and control both the Capital Goods and Consumable Goods, you live in a Capitalist society.

    If the Government owns and controls both the Capital Goods and Consumable Goods, you live in a Socialist society.

    If private citizens are allowed to own the Capital Goods, but the Government controls the production of Consumable Goods you live in a fascist society.

    What kind of Government do you think we live in based on these facts? So what is wrong with the Republicans calling it like it is? These are not deragatory childish insults like the Democrats use. It is just facts.

    Me? I think we just live in a messed up society.
    By Greg P. @ 03/08/10 11:30:21 AMreport abuse
  • darn tax cuts did it again
    From the article:

    "Obama's tax-cutting agenda is by far the biggest contributor to those budget gaps, the CBO said. "

    ""Over the next 10 years, those policies would reduce revenues and boost outlays for refundable tax credits by a total of $3.0 trillion," wrote Douglas W. Elmendorf, the CBO director. Combined with interest payments on that shortfall, the tax cuts account for the entire increase in deficits that would result from Obama's proposals. "

    "Other policy changes, such as Obama's signature health-care initiative and a plan to dramatically expand the federal student loan program, would have significant effects on the budget, Elmendorf wrote, but they generally would be paid for and therefore would not drive deficits higher. "

    and the republican solution to this problem - yep, you guessed it - TAX CUTS.

    It would be funny if they weren't deadly serious about it...or clowns like you folks agreed with it.

    ok, ok... it's still a little funny.
    By laughable @ 03/08/10 11:19:29 AMreport abuse
  • Re: $mooth Operator The trolls 'inexplicably' can't seem to conjure up a good set of talking points to adequately explain the economic ignorance of team Zero.
    I would also suggest that people stock up on “Self-Defense Apparatus”, non-perishable food and water and perhaps even some PVC pipe – just in case.
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 11:08:09 AMreport abuse
  • obamo
    Obama lackes in real world exp. he has never held a real job or work for a living he knows nothing about how to make a payroll. His IGNORANCE on the ECONOMY is show thought and Ace I think it is on purpose
    By Don @ 03/08/10 10:54:29 AMreport abuse
  • esocite
    Not surprised you would think that. Good argument though.
    By Butters @ 03/08/10 10:53:03 AMreport abuse
  • Some real hope & change
    The time has come for our national politicians to stop running for office on the platform of "I will bring home goodies from the federal treasury for our district/state", and start running on a platform of "I will do whatever I can to bring solvency back to the federal government."

    I know this won't go over well with the moocher crowd, but thoughtful people will understand.

    Am I correct that the cabinet positions for Dept of Education & Energy were created by Jimmy Carter? I believe we got along just fine without these departments prior to Jimmah, and we can probably get along without them now. Just an example - there are so many other things the feds could cut as well, AND they could impliment the Fair Tax.
    By Mutt Dog @ 03/08/10 10:39:39 AMreport abuse
  • "destroy the dreams of our children"
    The federal government's fiscal irresponsibility and the impending societal turmoil and possible collapse is exactly the reason why my wife and I have chosen to make no donation to the gene pool.
    By Diz @ 03/08/10 10:38:52 AMreport abuse
  • YES WE CAN!
    I agree with Stan. Even though Obama has spent a lot of money he has done so in order to invest in America and it's already starting to pay off. The recession that was predicted to turn into a decade-running depression is over, unemployment is turning the other way, and pretty soon people aren't going to have to worry aobut their healthcare anymore. Cleaning the environment is also expensive, but well worth it. Do you want your kids running around without debt but wading through corrosive waste at the playground? What's the point of giving kids a debt-free nation if they're breathing formaldehyde and living of a scorching desert planet pounded by killer winter storms all year?

    Obama's doing everything right, but being only 1 year in we're still experiencing the pain of Bush with the short-term pain of Obama's wise investments. Obama's a brainy guy! Just put aside your bigotry and give him a chance!
    By Stan's #1 Fan @ 03/08/10 10:37:47 AMreport abuse
  • Economic Ignorance of Team "O"
    Message to the Confderacy of Fools: Next time, hire an American to run the country, not some village idiot from Kenya.

    If leftists continue to harp that bloating federal spending to upwards of 90% of GDP is a good idea, then the only rational explanation I have is that they are economically ignorant. And if the MSM continues to bathe "O" in glowing accolades--despite his declared mission to literally bankrupt the nation--one can only surmise that the purchase of gold or swiss francs is the only rational action one can take at this point. Hyperinflation is a virtual certainty. The figurative nightmare of pushing a wheelbarrow full of "obama bucks" to buy a loaf of bread isn't all that far-fetched.
    By $mooth Operator @ 03/08/10 10:26:53 AMreport abuse
  • Butters
    Is this what passes for critical thinking on your part? If so, please stay out of the voting booth, you are not up to the task.
    By esorcire @ 03/08/10 10:10:02 AMreport abuse
  • Given these facts, Why is Barry the Bolshevik wanting to add the brand new, TRILLION dollar entitlement of Zombiecare® onto an already overburdened system?
    It's becoming painfully obvious that there seem to be only three explanations for Barry's behavior:

    He's either not intelligent or experienced enough to know that this will accelerate the destruction of the economy.

    He's insane and can't rationally figure what his ideology will do to this country.

    He's doing this on purpose.

    I'm not sure which is the better of those three options.
    By ACE @ 03/08/10 10:09:57 AMreport abuse
  • Now conservatives care about the deficit
    I love how for 8 years conservatives did not care about the deficit for 8 years because it was spending for halliburton stock to be raised at the cost of soldiers' lives. But when the money is going for possibly helping out the economy for Americans, then it is socialism, communism, marxism, statism, and whatever other ism conservative biased news likes to call it.
    By Butters @ 03/08/10 09:52:04 AMreport abuse
  • Obama
    President Obama is evil personified. I am convinced he is an evil overlord of the Sith
    By Lenny Sword @ 03/08/10 09:43:21 AMreport abuse
send to a friend  view as printer-friendly  RSS feeds
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement