Treasury: Federal deficit down 14.1 pct

[Tigermike 3,066]

Treasury: Federal deficit down 14.1 pct.

MARTIN CRUTSINGER

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The federal budget deficit, helped by a surge in government revenue, is running 14.1 percent below the pace of last year, the government reported Wednesday.

The Treasury Department said that with just one month to go in the budget year, the deficit totals $304.3 billion, down from $354.1 billion during the same period a year ago.

The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the entire year will be $260 billion, which would mean that September will see a sizable surplus.

The administration is somewhat less optimistic, forecasting a deficit of $295.8 billion for the current budget year, which ends Sept. 30.

However, both the CBO and the administration are expecting an improvement from last year's deficit of $319 billion, the third highest amount of red ink in history. The record deficit in dollar terms was $413 billion set in 2004.

Even with the improvement, Democrats point to CBO forecasts that the deficit over the next decade will total $1.76 trillion as evidence that President Bush's emphasis on tax cuts has put the country on an unsustainable fiscal path.

The administration counters that Bush's first term tax cuts helped to lift the country out of the 2001 recession and provided support for a strong economic rebound that has resulted in the gusher of revenues this year.

For August, the deficit jumped to $64.6 billion, up from $51.3 billion in August 2005. The federal government has run a deficit in August every year since 1954.

Through the first 11 months of the current budget year, revenues have totaled a record $2.12 trillion, up 11.5 percent from the same period a year ago.

Government spending is also at record levels so far this budget year, totaling $2.43 trillion, an increase of 7.6 percent from the same period a year ago.

The faster growth in revenues than in spending has meant that the 11-month deficit of $304.3 billion is 14.1 percent below the red ink run up during the same period a year ago.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...ws/15509664.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=2430047

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4184240.html

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Treasury: Federal deficit down 14.1 pct.

MARTIN CRUTSINGER

Associated Press

WASHINGTON - The federal budget deficit, helped by a surge in government revenue, is running 14.1 percent below the pace of last year, the government reported Wednesday.

The Treasury Department said that with just one month to go in the budget year, the deficit totals $304.3 billion, down from $354.1 billion during the same period a year ago.

The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the entire year will be $260 billion, which would mean that September will see a sizable surplus.

The administration is somewhat less optimistic, forecasting a deficit of $295.8 billion for the current budget year, which ends Sept. 30.

However, both the CBO and the administration are expecting an improvement from last year's deficit of $319 billion, the third highest amount of red ink in history. The record deficit in dollar terms was $413 billion set in 2004.

Even with the improvement, Democrats point to CBO forecasts that the deficit over the next decade will total $1.76 trillion as evidence that President Bush's emphasis on tax cuts has put the country on an unsustainable fiscal path.

The administration counters that Bush's first term tax cuts helped to lift the country out of the 2001 recession and provided support for a strong economic rebound that has resulted in the gusher of revenues this year.

For August, the deficit jumped to $64.6 billion, up from $51.3 billion in August 2005. The federal government has run a deficit in August every year since 1954.

Through the first 11 months of the current budget year, revenues have totaled a record $2.12 trillion, up 11.5 percent from the same period a year ago.

Government spending is also at record levels so far this budget year, totaling $2.43 trillion, an increase of 7.6 percent from the same period a year ago.

The faster growth in revenues than in spending has meant that the 11-month deficit of $304.3 billion is 14.1 percent below the red ink run up during the same period a year ago.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews...ws/15509664.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=2430047

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/fn/4184240.html

This is like Delta airlines bragging that while they are still operating at a huge loss this year, it is slightly less than last years huge loss. Woo woo! Party!

[Tigermike 3,066]

But if it had been in the opposite direction you would have been yelling from the roof tops. As you have many times in the past.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

But if it had been in the opposite direction you would have been yelling from the roof tops. As you have many times in the past.

I'd probably be thrilled these bozos only increased it another 14% given their track record. Here's what you and other so-called "conservatives" should be screaming about:

Government spending is also at record levels so far this budget year, totaling $2.43 trillion, an increase of 7.6 percent from the same period a year ago.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

They banked those numbers and use them in an election year, it's that simply. Those in power have a habit of controlling numbers and the timed release of the right numbers at specified times. I don't trust government, any government, and I certainly don't trust their numbers. Real monetary inflation hasn't hit yet. The recent rise in price inflation has come on the heals of higher crude prices which in turn has cause wage increase pressures. When the Asian markets begin to dump US Treasuries the monetary inflation will hit like a ton of bricks. We were expecting a soft-landing, but all indicators point to a MAJOR recession caused by a devaluing currency, a US Dollar problem.

The trouble in the U.S. case is that there never was any monetary tightening.

There were many small rate hikes, and the Greenspan Fed had probably hoped that

the higher costs of borrowing would exert some restraint on credit demand. But

it has not happened. It was a vain hope.

For no reason we can think of, the penultimate on the list is Spain. And

then comes the worst of all...the United States of America, with a current

account balance of a minus $829 billion.

Add up all the deficits of the entire world and you get a figure barely

half of the U.S. total.

The U.S. economy makes up a quarter of the world total...that it should

have more than half of the world's current account deficits is a

spectacular success - only made possible by its great wealth and status.

And here, in yesterday's news, comes the latest: "Record $68 billion trade

deficit in July," reports Bloomberg.

Nothing fails like success.

[otterinbham 0]

The Republicans betrayed their fiscally conservative ideals. They'll pay the piper, and soon. It simply infuriates me what has happened to my party.

[CCTAU 3,351]

The Republicans betrayed their fiscally conservative ideals. They'll pay the piper, and soon. It simply infuriates me what has happened to my party.

Can't always have it both ways. Fighting a war and balancing a budget just does not happen easily. If 9/11 had not happened, we might have seen a fiscally stronger republican government. But I truly believe that every member of government is lost when it handling the current situation. The only thing they seem to get right is how to hang on to their office.

At least we can say that the war on terror has kept anothe 9/11 from happening. Some see that as not as important. But if it were you (figuratively) or your loved ones that were attacked by terrorists, you would feel differently. I am not willing to sacrifice civilians for the sake of having a more fiscal congress. I would, however, like to see them learn to do both.

[otterinbham 0]

The Republicans betrayed their fiscally conservative ideals. They'll pay the piper, and soon. It simply infuriates me what has happened to my party.

Can't always have it both ways. Fighting a war and balancing a budget just does not happen easily. If 9/11 had not happened, we might have seen a fiscally stronger republican government. But I truly believe that every member of government is lost when it handling the current situation. The only thing they seem to get right is how to hang on to their office.

At least we can say that the war on terror has kept anothe 9/11 from happening. Some see that as not as important. But if it were you (figuratively) or your loved ones that were attacked by terrorists, you would feel differently. I am not willing to sacrifice civilians for the sake of having a more fiscal congress. I would, however, like to see them learn to do both.

I don't have a problem with funding the war. What you conveniently ignore is the Bush administration ramming through another huge entitlement program for the elderly, and its failure to rein in congressional spending on the entire gamut of programs, either through controlling the Congressional Republicans or by weilding the veto.

I simply don't understand how you can give Bush or the Republican party a pass on this CC. Are you so blinded by loyalty that you cannot see the simple economic facts?

[CCTAU 3,351]

What "simple" economic facts are there? We are at war. The dems would sell us all out, therfore we are trying to conduct a war and run government transparently. My issue I have with Bush is that he is trying to be all things to all people. I voted him in to bitch slap the dems and all I got was a bunch of trying to get along. But he's not the only problem. Like I said, its not that simple. Unless they rammed everything conservative through. And then the media backlash would be so bad that nothing would get done. Both parties are the blame. But to put it all on Bush or the Repubs is just wrong. Entitlement to the elderly? Are you elderly? Cause let me tell ya, they are not getting very much out of this. This move was done just to shut up the dems and show them what an idiot move it will be. This was done to force the SS issue earlier rather than later.

Like I said, we have a gorvernment that does not know what to do, so all they are doing is trying to keep there jobs. Bush is trying to soften his place in history. So when folks look back, they can say, "Well he tried to work with everybody." That's not what I voted for. But I still advocate that I will trade a higher deficit for safety at home. Apparently you would not.

And I am not giving them a pass. But you , like most folks, tend to be a damn genius after the fact.

And as for YOUR party, the alternative sucks even worse. All I can do is hope that the repubs learn from this and get better. Cause I know the dems are socialists and will try and play Robin Hood as soon as they get power. Why we, as republicans, do not fight as dirty as the dems, I cannot fathom. The lies and mistruths presented by the left go unchecked until even we begin to wonder. Your party is all you got. Vote dem and watch for NO new ideas (they don't have any) and get ready for higher taxes. I'm not saying the curent government is great, just that the alternative scares the hell out of me. Maybe that's what the repubs are banking on.

[otterinbham 0]

What "simple" economic facts are there? We are at war. The dems would sell us all out, therfore we are trying to conduct a war and run government transparently. My issue I have with Bush is that he is trying to be all things to all people. I voted him in to bitch slap the dems and all I got was a bunch of trying to get along. But he's not the only problem. Like I said, its not that simple. Unless they rammed everything conservative through. And then the media backlash would be so bad that nothing would get done. Both parties are the blame. But to put it all on Bush or the Repubs is just wrong. Entitlement to the elderly? Are you elderly? Cause let me tell ya, they are not getting very much out of this. This move was done just to shut up the dems and show them what an idiot move it will be. This was done to force the SS issue earlier rather than later.

Like I said, we have a gorvernment that does not know what to do, so all they are doing is trying to keep there jobs. Bush is trying to soften his place in history. So when folks look back, they can say, "Well he tried to work with everybody." That's not what I voted for. But I still advocate that I will trade a higher deficit for safety at home. Apparently you would not.

And I am not giving them a pass. But you , like most folks, tend to be a damn genius after the fact.

And as for YOUR party, the alternative sucks even worse. All I can do is hope that the repubs learn from this and get better. Cause I know the dems are socialists and will try and play Robin Hood as soon as they get power. Why we, as republicans, do not fight as dirty as the dems, I cannot fathom. The lies and mistruths presented by the left go unchecked until even we begin to wonder. Your party is all you got. Vote dem and watch for NO new ideas (they don't have any) and get ready for higher taxes. I'm not saying the curent government is great, just that the alternative scares the hell out of me. Maybe that's what the repubs are banking on.

Are you just freaking obtuse? CC, read this carefully: I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH FUNDING THE WAR. And, what's more you said it yourself: Bush is trying to be all things to all people. This is an absolute failure of leadership on his part. The Prescription Act is nothing less than a fiscal disaster, conceived and implemented by our President. I screamed then, I wrote letters, and did everything else possible to make my opinion heard. But BushBots like you apparently don't have either the backbone, the independence, or the integrity to admit that the man screwed up big time. Basically, what we have here isn't the 2nd George Bush. We have a 2nd Lyndon Johnson on our hands. And the damage to our country's long-term economic health will be incalculable.

Further, I am a Republican. And a better Republican than our President, apparently. Because I believe in fiscal conservatism, while your fearless leader has performed an end-around on every ideal this party espoused since the Reagan Revolution, and you don't have the basic stones to admit it. For you to blame Congress for this situation is laughable. Bush is supposed to act as the leader of the Republican congress. Yet by some twisted logic I cannot fathom, you conclude that Bush is not responsible for this Congress' spending excesses, even though he merrily signed every appropriations bill that crossed his desk.

You sit here and say things would be worse if the Democrats got the reins of power. Yet the Bush Administration and the Republican congress have become the Democrats, and you don't even realize it.

[CCTAU 3,351]

Bush has become a middle of the road politician. If not for abortion and gay marriage, the dems woudl love him. I do realize that. But I also realize that at this point in time, there are no politicians in office that understand "guns or butter." Try and implement that and the dems and the media would bring our country to a halt. Then the war on terror would begin to falter. Today's politics apparently have created politicians that walk a thin line afraid of rocking the boat. 43 started out rocking the boat and was beat down so badly for it that even his own party wavered. And yes, congress is responsible for themselves. So when the repub congress during the Clintax years made a decision, it was really Clintax that did it? Does not matter who is in the white house, congress has to answer for themselves.

I am beginning to come to the opinion that 43 can only do one thing well at a time. If so, I choose security against terror.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

You mean "TERRA." Dude, where's my country? We are bankrupt and everyone sees it but a few, and you are one of those few.

[AURaptor 1,128]

You mean "TERRA." Dude, where's my country? We are bankrupt and everyone sees it but a few, and you are one of those few.

Your idiotic cries for attention aren't even amusing anymore. It's just become sad. Oh, wait....by 'bankrupt' did you mean your buddies over at AirAmerica ? Guess i'ts time for another call to daddy Soros !!!!