Feed on
Posts
Comments

Is this.

So the budget will actually be $200 billion further in deficit this year than we were told just a month ago (once again, CHANGE we can believe in!). When you start talking in trillions, we see that the deficit will be $1.8 trillion instead of $1.6. That doesn’t look too bad now does it? It’s just a change of 0.2. Well, remember that the “irresponsible” Bush deficits were $400 billion last year … so this little mistake or change represents fifty-percent of the magnitude of the entire budget deficit coming into the year.

Don’t mistake this for my approval of the prior clown in the Oval Office.

2 Responses to “The Problem When You Start Talking in Trillions”

  1. Andrew says:

    It’s really depressing that the entire economy of Canada fits inside the budget deficit.

  2. Harry Wood says:

    Obama assumes that the Keyensean Multiplier will be 1.4. He also gets his numbers from the CBO, and other sources that assume tax rates at the margin have no effect on behavior.

    The foundation of such nonsense is that they can take our money and spend it more wisely. For a host of additional reasons, they will spend more, and collect less, and pretty soon it will be a hell of a lot more of the Canadian economy, which is a hell of a lot smaller now because of guiding itself by the principles working now in the U.S.

    The deficit will expand, and all the pressure will come to bear on the treasury and the Federal Reserve to create money.

Leave a Reply

immediate vortex