Shrinking Deficit - Page 3

Nielsio · #21 08-26-2007, 06:43 PM

There is no way in hell that I believe the United States as an organization has become more financially healthy in the past decade.

ThaSaltCracka · #22 08-26-2007, 06:44 PM

It could be included. Perhaps Bush has cut out everything so there is a surplus, but when you subtract the War and all his other [censored], you get this deficit.

old dogg · #23 08-26-2007, 06:50 PM

All I'm doing is giving you the numbers the CBO released. Ask the democratic controlled Congress for the rest.

tolbiny · #24 08-26-2007, 06:54 PM

[ QUOTE ]
All I'm doing is giving you the numbers the CBO released. Ask the democratic controlled Congress for the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why its the numbers you posted are meaningless, you are just parroting what someone else, with an obvious agenda, told you.

old dogg · #25 08-26-2007, 06:57 PM

You know it all, what are the actual figures.

tolbiny · #26 08-26-2007, 07:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
You know it all, what are the actual figures.

[/ QUOTE ]

This site is in line with other sources, has the "current" annual cost at

2003: 53.5 billion
2004: 77.3 billion
2005: 87.3 billion
2006: 100.4 billion
each of these are numbers ending on sep 30 of the year stated.

These numbers don't include future obligations for wounded and retired soldiers which is currently estimate at ~ 250billion for benefits equal to what first gulf war veterans received, and of course doesn't include other liabilities incurred over this time period (Social Security).

Using your numbers with these numbers you get

2004: 490.3
2005: 405.3
2006: 348.4

old dogg · #27 08-26-2007, 07:36 PM

Got my numbers here http://www.cbo.gov/

tolbiny · #28 08-26-2007, 07:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Got my numbers here http://www.cbo.gov/

[/ QUOTE ]

And where is the breakdown for military spending to see if it includes the WOT expenses?

old dogg · #29 08-26-2007, 07:53 PM

As i said gave you the numbers from CBO. Not here to argue anything. But after looking at your site I don't see were I would actually call it creditable. Even with the war which we all know is expensive the fact remains the tax cuts are working. We'll talk again when the free spending Democrats take over and were all paying more in taxes.

Kaj · #30 08-26-2007, 07:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
... the free spending Democrats take over ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Get a clue.

The Repubs from 2000-2006 with all branches of the fed govt were as free spending as they come (actually, more so). Stop listening to Hannity and open your eyes.

Here's some data showing how the Repubs, while controlling all 3 branches of the fed govt, really took a bite out of federal spending.