• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • The Truth about Obama's Budget Deficits, in Pictures

    Through the fog of the debt limit negotiations, President Obama has attempted to shift the blame for America’s deficit crisis to politicians at large, claiming that “neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem.” Though the culture of overspending is endemic in Washington, don’t let the President fool you—some are a lot more guilty than others.

    The fact is that Obama’s budget would set America on a dangerous fiscal course that leads to massive deficits well into the future—hitting $1.2 trillion in 2012 and, after dipping slightly, rising back to $1.2 trillion again by 2021.

    The chart above illustrates what the country’s fiscal future looks like. As analyzed by the Congressional Budget Office, even after the massive tax hikes included in Obama’s budget, federal deficits total $9.5 trillion. In other words, under his budget, the President would more than double the national debt in just 10 years. Simply put, Obama’s budget (which didn’t even win the support of his own party in the United States Senate) would push America over a fiscal cliff.

    The President’s media apologists are attempting to carry water for Obama and shift the blame for the budget mess squarely at the feet of President George W. Bush. Specifically, they argue that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, and the recession are all to blame for today’s deficits. It’s an argument we heard before from Obama since the days of his campaign, and it’s an argument that is as flawed today as it was then. One simple number explains it well: the budget deficit figure in 2007, the last Bush year prior to the recession. The tax cuts were in full effect, both wars were raging, and the recession had not yet struck, yet the budget deficit in 2007 was $160 billion, or about a tenth of Obama’s deficit this year.

    Then there’s the President’s stimulus spending binge, which made matters worse. The policy was rooted in the false premise—recited by The New York Times—that government spending can propel the economy out of a recession. Well, it hasn’t. The economy is stuck in slow, and the hundreds of billions of stimulus dollars have only added to today’s debt and deficits.

    So much for the past. Looking forward, America’s fiscal woes aren’t due to wars, recessions, or tax cuts. As Brian Riedl explained, the root of America’s fiscal woes is entitlement spending:

    Entitlements and other obligations are driving the deficits. Specifically, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and net interest costs are projected to rise by 5.4% of GDP between 2008 and 2020. The Bush tax cuts are a convenient scapegoat for past and future budget woes. But it is the dramatic upward arc of federal spending that is the root of the problem.

    To be fair, President Obama did inherit these programs. So, has he proposed remedial action? No, he’s acted to make the entitlement excesses worse by pushing through his Obamacare health care reform, which created a whole new entitlement.

    Without a doubt, deficits during the Bush Administration were too high, especially in the early years. More could and should have been done to restrain spending. But, without a doubt, the Bush deficits were puny compared to what Obama and his congressional allies have inflicted. For Obama’s apologists to seek cover in the Bush deficits is shameless. To use these diversions to now take attention away from the real problem to which Obama has added is outrageous.

    Entitlements are the real deficit drivers of the future, and as the chart above shows, if taxes stay at their historical norms, then entitlement spending will consume all the revenues by 2052. And that’s the fact the apologists ignore, despite the fact that even in the President’s 2012 budget entitlements account for 58 percent of spending (as you can see in the chart below).

    So next time Obama or his allies in the press go back to the well and recite the well-worn verse that spending is all the other guy’s fault, take a look at the facts. President Obama has steered a fiscal course that will lead to more spending and deeper deficits and ultimately to vastly higher taxes. If you want to know the real cause of our deficits today, the answer lies primarily with Obama. If you want to know the real cause of our deficits in the near future, the answer lies in entitlement spending, which Obamacare increases.


    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    98 Responses to The Truth about Obama's Budget Deficits, in Pictures

    1. Pingback: The Truth about Obama’s Budget Deficits, in Pictures | Americas Review

    2. L. Davis says:

      This is absolutely astounding. It seems obvious that this man has no concern whatsoever for the future of our country. How can anyone argue that? The Democrats have led the way in this fiasco…with their tax increases, their regulations that prevent anything that would create jobs other than in government, and in particular doing their best to destroy the energy companies that have 'fueled' our growth and industry allowing the US to not only be economically successful, but aid the rest of the world in health, nutrition and poverty. We have allowed the Democrats and the President to make enemies of the very industry that has and will sustain us. My God, this isn't rocket science.

      Apparently gong to Harvard did not provide an education that would encourage loyalty to 'his own' country….but destroy it. tired of the lies and the polarizastion of our citizens in an attempt to serve a second term. God help us if that happens because then all bets are off. Electing anyone in 2012 is our only hope for a future for our children.

      • The Skip says:

        I don't think it is a matter of him not having a concern for the future (although it certainly seems that way), I think it is more of the fact that he hasn't the faintest idea of what it means to lead. I have never seen someone more clueless as to what to do next and that is evident in who he has appointed to certain positions. At this point, I hope my Grand kids don't feel this wrath because I fear my kids are already doomed.

      • beth says:

        You are assuming he cares about America's future. If you view everything he does through the prism of one who wants America to fail, he's a complete success. Besides killing Bin Laden, I can't think of one thing he's done that has had benefit to the US. And if the truth be known, I think that snuck up on him, and what got Bin Laden had been put in place by Bush.

        • Nathan Hale says:

          I believe that you are right about Bin Laden. The only thing the President had to do with it was to sign off on the mission and come in from the golf course long enough to watch it on closed-circuit TV – check the offical White House photo, and you will see POTUS at the back of the room with a jacket quickly thrown over his shoulders to hide the golf shirt. It's good that we got BL, but the wheels were set in motion long before.

      • Rodney says:

        These companies are not interested in creating jobs until President Obama is out of office. I think we the people should pull our money out of the stock market and invest in U.S. Bond Market, since they do not want to invest in creating jobs, we should stop supporting them by purchasing their stock. We should let them see who is keeping them in business and providing them with all that cash they are so proud of.

      • TPL says:

        You do know your taxes were contuined from the Bush years.

      • marc schwartz says:

        Any objective person would limit the graph on Obama's deficits to Obama's term in office. If only his first term were graphed, it would be clear that the debt avalanche was started by Bush, and Obama turned it around. To expect ht anyone could stop a disaster of that magnitude cold in a year is unreasonable. After Obama gained some traction, though he did turn it around as the graph shows. You might also want to show a graph of what the debt would be if the Bush tax cuts were never passed and the economy wasn't burdened by the unnecessary war in Iraq. You can't blame those on Obama.

        • Texas American says:

          Are you enjoying the comfortable feeling that you and your loved ones can enjoy the American Lifestyle (shopping, going to the movies, attending public functions, enjoying a park, attending Church, and driving a car down the street) without some lunatic Jihadist blowing themselves up in front of you, detonating a car bomb that tears your body to shreds, or hood men with AK-47s storming house decapitating you and your family all the while filming it for public display? You can thank the US Military and a President (George W.) that had the guts to take no BS from the UN or other Countries taking the fight to their soil. I am sorry if that is not good enough for you to have paid for that. If you wish, I can send Johnny Jihad and his compadres your contact info so they can "Get In Touch" with you and your family to log your complaint.

      • orwell says:

        Before Bush took office, the CBO projection was 2.3T in *surplus* by 2011. How is the 14T debt now all on 3yrs of Obama?? Entitlements, Tax Cuts, Defense Spending (in addition to the wars) might all add up to 14T. Have recent Republicans really demonstrated appropriate fiscal competence?

      • jack says:

        The problem is he does care about the future, isn't that what entitlement programs are? When you're old enough you get a paycheck from the government as well as cheap healthcare. Baby boomers are whats draining the system. We need a option to pay into social security.

        • Anon says:

          Ummm, You already ARE paying into Social Security. That's why it ISN'T really an ENTITLEMENT. It was suppose to be a retirement plan. That is what everyone had been sold on.

          Unfortunately too many politicians have seen it as a giant piggy bank they can raid to fund their "little projects"

      • William Donigan says:

        It is apparent that neither republicans or democrats wants the public to know what is in the budget; military cuts, agri subsidy cuts (increased food costs), coal, oil, and natural gas subsidy cuts (higher oil N.G. and heating cost) this all equals a bigger recession. Why aren't republicans telling it like it is? If the so called middle class cannot buy food, heat or gas for their cars we are into the second great depression.

    3. soopermexican says:

      Awesome graphs!!! If only Americans could add,subtract, count…. we're doomed.

      • Richard says:

        If we did learn then the system would change so the voters could not vote on facts but Hollywood style impressions.

    4. Stirling says:

      This is the result of the Great Society coming to fruition. When the government is determined to be "all things to all people" and the people accept that this is Ok and acceptable behavior the end result looks more like socialist Europe (no consitution, no individual rights). Will the government argue the next step to save our country is to abolish the Constitution to save the entitlement state? Let's hope not, I do not wish to be ruled by a dictator/King, etc.

      • bhart2000 says:

        That is ridiculous. Obviously, we are no where near a socialist state nor is the Constitution going to be 'abolished'. To even suggest so is ultra conservative propaganda and infantile.

      • Gone Fishin' says:

        Sadly, we are already ruled by the State.

    5. George Colgrove, VA says:

      Stand&Poors stated that there needs to be $4 trillion of cuts MINIMUM to avoid a downgrade.
      This congress cannot bound future congresses, as they could not bound future congresses with Obamacare.
      The only solution is to cut MORE THAN $400 billion this year (FY12).
      Congress can do this by applying a 15% across the board cut. This is NOT POLITICAL as nothing will be elimimated, but just sliced by 15%. This should be applied evenly to every program office on up. My only exception is that though the DoD shall be cut by 15%, these cuts shall avoid soldiers and necessary equipment. The 15% cut to the DoD shall be calabrated to effect only non-military spending.

      • Anon says:

        We also NEED to cut politician's salaries by at least 50%. No politician should be making more than the average salary of the constituents in their districts.

      • Texas American says:

        Here's how I see it to rescue our economy and our dignity.
        1. Close our coffers to the multitude of Illegals. That's money right out of the window. Don't believe me, why do you think Latino populated areas are full of Western Unions, Mexican phone cards and the like? Money that they get and earn leaves the Country. They don't pay Federal or State Income takes so all that the Government gets from them is sales tax.
        2. Close the Borders and enact Legislation and Laws already on the books. The vast majority of Illegals don't come here to be a part of American. No, they come here thinking only of themselves. They are a huge tax burden on our educational and health systems. Most are welfare recipients. Look. I am all for a person that LEGALLY immigrates here and actively in the true American way of life. Illegals are just the opposite. They are breaking laws by their own actions but nothing is done about it. When an individual, organization, or State Official does something about these law breakers, the screaming Liberals and special interests groups go on the rampage.
        3. Bring back US manufacturing jobs. Stop bastardizing American jobs to China! Stop filling our store shelves and landfills with cheap, ofttimes dangerous, Chinese goods. Look around cities and towns across America and you will see building after building of empty warehouses and manufacturing centers. That is where America has lost the most jobs. We made it too difficult with regulations, taxes, and unions to do business in America. That has to change. Manufacturing HAS to return to American Soil.

        Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto prophetically spoke if ordered to fight against the US, "I shall run wild considerably for the first six months or a year, but I have utterly no confidence for the second and third years." What he alluded to was the might and ingenuity of American manufacturing and the staunch determination of the American People if so aroused in anger. You may remember him as the Japanese Imperial Navy Admiral who orchestrated the sneak attack on Pearl Harbor launching the American Might into World War II. No, it was not just a Hollywood Movie. We vowed never to let that happen again on American Soil or that of our Allies yet here we sit with you Liberal minded folk calling the Global War On Terror a farce, that it is unwarranted. War is hell no matter how you spin it. It is going to cost lives and rack up a very large bill. We did not ask for this War just like we did not ask for World War II. These Extremists, these Terrorists, wanted a fight and now they have it. Should we walk into this fight with one hand tied behind our backs and television crews spotlighting us as we make a night landing? Maybe you remember that watered down response that ended up in a near disaster? Let me see, where was that…oh yeah… Somalia. Guess who was at the helm of the Good Ship America? Good ole Slick Willy himself; Clinton.
        4. Flat Tax. 10% for everyone. That includes all lower class and immigrants. Absolutely no tax breaks or loop holes. The IRS would be down-sized by over 2/3's netting a huge savings on the Federal Budget as well.

        The following ideas are not financially centered but do have an impact on the economy. Pride of Ownership. If you take ownership of something, you will put in the effort to take care it.
        1. The Pledge of Allegiance and Prayer should be allowed back in schools. Like it or not, this a Country that was founded by Christians with Christian principles who praised God for his wonderful Blessings. If this offends you, then you have every right to leave and find the country of your choosing that fits you better.
        2. Adhere to the Constitution. Until the People (not Sheeple) vote to abolish the Constitution, it shall be followed.
        3. Respect the Flag. It is more than just cloth. It is the sinew that binds us together. Many lives were lost, blood given, and sacrifices made so that America could exist and more of the same to keep America Free. The Flag symbolizes that. To disrespect that Flag dishonors the sacrifices of our forbearers. I take great offense to that and will address you accordingly.
        3. No matter where we came from or our family history, the language of the American People is English. Learn it, use it. Teach your kids your ancestral language as a second language at home.

    6. Bobbie says:

      what about you, Mr. President? You're the leader of both parties, so the blame is you! You fail to make appropriate decisions that led America where we're at today. You went out of your way to cause businesses more burdens. You refuse practical solutions and refuse to hold yourself accountable. Your priorities are your own and doesn't reflect the corrections of what America needs to clean up the mess you've made of the principles and values and misinterpreting the American people's Constitution. WEAK!

      As your fan base is that of the democratic party shows the same ignorance, nothing but weakness in America as you label people according to your entitled, as inferior so you have the tax payers paying their PERSONAL expenses? I don't know why people would feel proud to be represented by the democratic party. I left the democratic party after I was unknowing at the time, LABELED! Democrats have no influence to get people on their own! They'd rather sympathize for their own personal job security. Danger to personal dignity! childish, insincere destructive democrat lies and rants. Just tells me exactly the kind of people the people of this country doesn't deserve in leadership.

    7. Pingback: Budget 2011: Past Deficits vs. Obama’s Deficits in Pictures

    8. Pingback: Bush Deficit vs. Obama Deficit in Pictures

    9. Pingback: How Barack Obama is destroying the American economy in two nauseating charts | Right Wing News

    10. Pingback: The Truth about Obama’s Budget Deficits, in Pictures | ChrisInMaryville's Blog

    11. Pingback: You Rethugnicans need to stop scaring people over our reckless spending! » Cold Fury

    12. Pingback: Struggle to Solve Debt Limit Crisis Goes On

    13. Pingback: arlesheimreloaded » Die Ausgaben, nicht die Steuern, Stupid » arlesheimreloaded

    14. George Dorn says:

      Your analyses appear myopic and flawed as they don't account for the scale of debt that the Bush administration locked the country into for the future to come, not just when he was in office. This doesn't mean the current presidency is doing a great job either, but the fact is that the previous government got the US into this mess to begin with, it's not the other way around. A so-called 'conservative government' has never led the country in any direction but down, from Reagen onwards. Your ideology stinks.

      • Jack Savage says:

        Incredible. From 1980 until 2006, America enjoyed prosperity like no other nation on earth ever had. The key was that Americans handed the keys to the GOP. As soon as Democrats took control in 2006 and fell asleep at the switch, the economy, morale, confidence and any other indicator you care to mention began to tank.
        You people continue to blame Bush without one shred of evidence, and take the coward's way out every single time. And we wonder why this country has gone straight to hell.
        The analysis is perfect. It's a shame liberals can't add and subtract.

        • Matt Albrecht says:

          I'm not sure you can read or comprehend so well. The fact that you have not seen any evidence as to the problems Bush helped to create is mind blowing.

      • Jess says:

        Reagen did the right thing by lowering taxes and giving money back to the people. That way, people had more money to spend and put back into circulation. It was Reagen who brought us out of a recession then. I think people need to take a look at history before they start spouting off. I swear, if the US re-elects Obama in 2012, this whole country is going to hell in a hand basket. I can't believe people still believe in him. But I suppose, with so much liberal media it's hard for people to see the truth.

        • Pam says:

          I agree with you 100%!

        • Matt Albrecht says:

          Do you realize he gave the biggest tax cuts to the wealthy? You believe in that trickle down Reagen-omics?? You're ok with paying a higher percentage of your income in taxes than the millionaires and billionaires?

          • Mike says:

            You do realize you all misspelled Reagan, right?

          • The middle class don't pay a higher percentage of income in taxes than millionaires and billionaires. Their taxable income is taxed at a higher rate. So you're either lying or misconstruing the taxes. Capital gains are not taxed the same as ordinary income because they aren't. They are earned as the result of investment–of putting the money to work. The money that was put to work has already been taxed as ordinary income.

    15. harpo says:

      i think the repubs should get the best compromise they can so they are not painted as the bad guys by the left and their media. then repeat,repeat,repeat a clear and concise message and leave it up to the voters to choose the future path of our country in 2012

    16. DBG says:

      Implementing the Fair Tax would go a long way to solving our debt crisis.

    17. RedBaker says:

      The CBO data shown in the first graph has 2009 deficit at $1.4 trillion; the actual increase in national debt was $1.88 trillion. For 2010 they show $1.2 trillion; actual borrowing was $1.65 trillion. This year is called $1.65 trillion, and the real borrowing therefore is likely to be $2 trillion or more. Check the Treasury website history of national debt. to see for yourself. The standard figure reported is "public debt" and does not count the amount embezzled each year from the trust funds – typically retirement money of some type.

    18. Rich says:

      I have yet to see a fiscally conservative republican all the way back to reagan so why should I believe one will come now.

    19. Bobbie says:

      some of those under the influence of the democratic mindset think the idea of personal freedom and liberty stink? Some defend the crisis today as a natural phenomena caused by a predecessor but disingenuous to ignore any but ALL consideration? Like the democratic majority including Obama himself!!!

      If every president used excuses from their predecessor, we'd be a third world country today. If we had wiser leadership that didn't show distaste for "some" people who've achieved their American dream, while demeaning the principles and values American citizens are accustom to, NONE OF THIS WOULD'VE COME TO BE! There are plenty of countries that don't promote freedom and liberty and the pursuit of ones own happiness that this country used to!!!! Why is the democratic party so punishing to Americans?

      America doesn't deserve the fraud and corruption, the irresponsibility, the dereliction, slush funds behind our backs with our money to cover this unruly democratic party who speaks without thought to sooth the mind, where all THEIR consequences are put on us. "Gosh we didn't know that would happen!" and "we're not accountable." evil doesn't take accountability, they let the chips fall where they may!!!!

      For any party that insists on compromising the principles of this country, is not the party fitted to lead this country!!!!! and for Jay Carney to suggest this is what the American people want? No doubt he speaks for unprincipled American people whom we're getting to know their unfortunate disposition. Democrats convince weakness to not only instill resentment but to hold people back from inspiration that would build their own personal strength and dignity. Democrats screw the good of America!!!!!!…guess they like it because nothing is changing their mind. ICK!

      May the Tea Party Republicans hold the line for the good of America they represent!

      • omsrof says:

        to Bobbie and others ( including the mainstream media and even some Republican politicians )

        Lets get this straight- Members of the Democrat party are Democrats- not democratic

        - democratic is a form of government that subscribes to democracy ( rule by the people )

        – Democrat is the term for people and politicians who are a part of the Democrat Party.

        - Democrat politicians and members of the Democrat party are Democrats- not democratic

        It is wrong and misleading to label members of the Democrat party as democratic congressmen, democratic president, democratic politicians etc, etc

        the word democratic has generally a positive connotation for most people and that is why the media and the Democrats want to label themselves democratic instead of Democrats !!

        and further – the United States form of government is a republic- not a democracy.

    20. Jerry says:

      I am extremely proud of the conservative members of the House. Obviously, they have made a difference already in the mood of the rest of the members. So now we can be thankful that these men and women of character are on the side of bringing our country from so many shameful policies. Hopefully, we will get rid of all the pork spending, behind the back deals, and waste of our tax money on programs that have no significance. And why do we pledge money to other countries that hate us, would go to war against us, that only want our money, which incidentally, we do not have anyway? We have to borrow to pay anyone, even our elderly citizens on social security, who have paid into the system, and now find that their money is no longer available. We know the rest of that story. Change is our only answer. Governor Perry of Texas already knows the answer. I hope we will follow his lead, and seek our God with our whole heart.

      • Ed_ says:

        Your God. Not "our God". I am not Christian, thank you very much. How about some separation of church and state.

      • Sam says:

        No disrepect intended, but two things. One, what could you possibly be proud of the republican congress men and women for doing? Practically all they do is sit around all day rejecting anything obama and the democrats say! Its childlike and two, do you, as rick perry does, believe that gays are not equal men and women and therefor should not deserve to be together? As well as this do u also believe that children should have the right to openly celebrate christmas? Now being serious, do you believe that the doe should be exterminated and their job passed off to another department because "anyone can do what they can do?" Just wondering

    21. Nancy says:

      Seems to me that SS and medicare are misnamed "entitlement" programs. We paid into them. The reali entitlement are Welfrare system with Aid for dependent families, food stamps etc. The statistics on illegals get under these programs shows that they need to go! Get rid of Obamacare and some of the Czars he appointed. Might also get rid of the EPA

      • Gloria says:

        Nancy, that is right on!

        • guest says:

          do you not have the welfare of your children in mind? Eliminating EPA increases Lead PCBs, and mercury poisoning in children, asthmatic children, children drinking contaminated water. If you believe situations like "Erin Brockovich" and "A Civil Action" are only fictional drama, then you are wrong. High priced attorneys are hired by US corporations to avoid cleaning up hazardous wastes.

    22. Scott says:

      Good argument, Mr. Dorn. Apparently if you say it with enough conviction it becomes a fact, and the actual facts become fiction.

    23. bob says:

      Not to be rude. But comparing Proposed Presidential Budgets vs. actual ones makes absolutely no sense. No President expects to get their budget passed intact….It is part of a negotiating process. If you want to compare them, compare their proposed budgets OR their actual budgets after the fact. Comparing actual to proposed is just, well, silly. Or you can prove me wrong by finding me a president who passed their budget with no changes…Oh wait…you won't find one.

      • Jack Savage says:

        The comparison makes perfect sense. If a president is a serious person, in times of overspending he will submit a budget that takes that into account. If not, he presents a budget that adds $1 trillion to the debt. Obama is in over his head and is simply not a competent or serious individual.

      • @scythekain says:

        @Bob, it's hard to say since the Democrats have not passed a budget in over 800 days.

        Which means Obama has never had a budget thus spends as much as he wants.

    24. Pingback: New economic thinking - 8. Quality of argument

    25. Pingback: Why there is no left-populist movement. | RedState

    26. Bobbie says:

      and bob, where's "change" to be expected? the only "change" seen is making matters worse!

    27. Pingback: Why there is no left-populist movement. | We The Conservatives

    28. Pingback: Why there is no left-populist movement.

    29. Publius says:

      The presidential budget is the beginning of a negotiation… assuming it becomes law without change is absurd. I'm sure that the president himself would be opposed to implementing it as is. He has repeatedly pointed out the need to reform entitlements, especially medicare, but actually making a realistic proposal without cover from republicans is political suicide for him. So the budget mostly reflects the status quo (note that, misleadingly, the graph above does not — it reflects current law, which has a bunch of tax cuts expiring — meaning that actually most of what the chart shows is that the tax cuts are driving the deficit). Unfortunately most republicans aren't willing to make reasonable compromises, and the whole political discussion is in fairy, fairy land.

      • Gweilo66 says:

        The presidential budget is the beginning of a negotiation… assuming it becomes law without change is absurd." Umm…he's supposed to be leading the nation, not offering an opening bid.
        "He has repeatedly pointed out the need to reform entitlements, especially medicare, but actually making a realistic proposal without cover from republicans is political suicide for him." First off..what actual suggestions? When has he seriously proposed changes to entitlements? He blew off his own debt reduction commission suggestions. And blaming the Republicans for not giving him cover? The Dems abandoned his budget proposal. He couldn't get cover from his own party. He initially wanted a "clean" debt ceiling raise..i.e. no strings attached. It was ONLY due to pressure from Repubs, mostly Tea party folk, that Obama got religion and started giving lip service to spending cuts…and only if linked to tax increases. By the way, In 2003, tax receipts were $1.782 trillion. But after the Bush tax cuts were implemented revenues reached their highest level in history, $2.568 trillion in 2007. It was the growth of the economy, spurred by those tax cuts, that increased the government’s revenue. Had Bush then embarked on a program to cut the size of government, we probably would not be in the situation we are today.

    30. Greg Batla says:

      This really puts it into perspective! Thanks for sharing something that's so easy to understand and digest!

    31. Marilyn Konfino says:

      For the politically impaired…

    32. Marilyn Konfino says:

      For visual learners and the politically impaired….America’s fiscal woes aren’t due to wars, recessions, or tax cuts. As Brian Riedl explained, the root of America’s fiscal woes is entitlement spending. Entitlements will consume all tax revenues by 2052!

    33. Pissed off says:

      More conservatives lies from the propaganda machine.

    34. TPL says:

      Everyone says cut taxes! That is the biggest joke! Cutting taxes does not and never has created jobs. It hasn't worked under any president. If cutting taxes worked everyone would be employed now. All the corporations are doing is stuffing there pockets with the cut taxes. Give me a break. Some of our best years financially were in the 90's under Clinton. No matter what the tax rate is big corporation will always make money. They could hire plenty of people now but they are not going too. They are to busy making money. Just read what Warren Buffet said today. All our jobs are going overseas for lesser pay. The corporations have no morales!

      • Gweilo66 says:

        "They could hire plenty of people now but they are not going too." Because the guy YOU voted for is heading up a barrage of destabilizing policies and promises of more. They don't trust this admin and can't plan. Obama thinks he can simulate a growing economy via public sector spending aka "stimulus". Wasn't that joke about shovel ready jobs funny? Yep. Hardy har har. Plenty of new jobs at the IRS… The most shovel ready job is his own. As with JFK and Reagan, tax cuts do help. In 2003, tax receipts were $1.782 trillion. But after the Bush tax cuts were implemented revenues reached their highest level in history, $2.568 trillion in 2007. It was the growth of the economy, spurred by those tax cuts, that increased the government’s revenue. Had Bush then embarked on a program to cut the size of government, we probably would not be in the situation we are today.

      • jvg says:

        Hey TLP why don't we just take all of everyones money who makes more than 1 million a year. That would add upp to about 800 billion. Yep that would get us out of our mess. We could then just pay them unemployment which ,according to Nancy Pelosi, is the best way to simulate the econmy. But your right, corporations will make profits regardless and that's a good thing. Your neighbor probably works for one, my 401 k is tied to them, they provide you the goods and services to live your lifestyle, they innovate and create jobs. But not so much anymore because they have been taxed out of the U.S.( In cased you haven't noticed its a global economy) And if you tax them more here, guess who it gets passed on to? You and me, the middle class. DUh, thats great. The problem with democrats is that they have no concept of cause and effect. They would rather tear down and demonize the successful under the guise of helping the "middle class working families" than raise up those on the bottom end. They would rather create dependency. Why dont you just move to sweden or Europe, their doing sooooo well over there with their spending and taxing!

    35. Gweilo66 says:

      I wonder how the economy would be doing if he followed through on his previously stated desires: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 "Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."
      Barack Obama videotaped San Francisco Chronicle interview, January 2008.
      Fortunately that was just a statement of a err green candidate on the campaign trail.
      Wait..he's still pursuing that under the radar via the EPA. Oh..that will do wonders for revenue.

    36. Michael says:

      This is precisely the problem….Your figures are wrong, the Republicans are the cause the Democrats are the cause…..Yes they are both the cause of this problem. We can twist and turn the figures a thousand ways and it brings us back to one thing, REBUBLICRATS. Both are at fault and I see the problem as this….The Democrats are far ahead of the Republicans in taking this country toward Socialism and McCain would have been more of the same but on a slow boil. It's time we learn to do for ourselves and teach the younger generations that a Republic doesn't come without cost. We all most share and government needs to be Lean and let it citizens prosper without restraints. NO CRADLE TO GRAVE. We can only aid others if we first learn to stand on our own. Democracy is earned, not RIGHT to be given back to us from OUR own Government.

    37. Awasis says:

      You left out that, due to the Great Recession, tax revenue to GPD is lowest it has been since 1950. But if you are trying to distort things, I guess you would leave this out.

    38. Faking the Graph says:

      @Awasis – Truth about Tax vs. GDP was not only left out.
      Folks check out the graph. Count the year ticks at the bottom carefully.
      In 2011 the Tax as a % of GDP is indeed the lowest level shown on the graph.
      But they've added a mythical projection for 2012 bringing the graph back to the average (18%).
      Then – they drew the dotted line which is meant to represent current day.
      But it isn't current day.
      Whoever made this chart is intentionally misleading. They didn't want anyone to get the idea that taxes are very low right now.
      Let me repeat that statement – they didn't want anyone to get the idea that taxes relative to GDP are very low right now.

      The second, maybe more salient point, is to note that taxes since 1965 have been pretty consistent relative to GDP.
      Many would have us believe that taxes are at an all time high.
      It is simply not true.
      As this chart shows – Government Revenue has wavered in the 15-20% range for years. Most often it has rested very close the 18% average.

      Total tax revenue as a % of GDP has not changed over the years.
      What has changed is how that revenue amount is balanced across the citizenry.

      Taxes among the top 5-10% of wage earners have gone down.
      Taxes among the middle class have gone up.

    39. DougieFresh says:

      The graph of Tax and "Entitlement" spending as a % of GDP is misleading in more ways than one.

      The graph includes Social Security on the spending end of things.
      But does not include the monies that we all pay for Social Security (when we work) on the revenue side.

      Keep your eyes out for this. It happens a lot in the media…
      …and on the floor of the House and Senate.

    40. Jesse says:

      "The tax cuts were in full effect, both wars were raging, and the recession had not yet struck, yet the budget deficit in 2007 was $160 billion, or about a tenth of Obama’s deficit this year.
      Then there’s the President’s stimulus spending binge, which made matters worse."

      Buddy you skipped 2008 in your explanation and I stopped reading immediately. 2008 is when the economy TANKED. Of course you left this wide open. So 2008 just didn't happen. OK LOL!!!!!!!

      • Ed_ says:

        Exactly. Bush threw everything into the bottomless pit. Doesn't anyone realize it takes more time and money to get something out of the hole than it does to put something into it? Doesn't anyone realize it also takes more time and money to clean up a mess than it does to make it? Obama told us it was going to be a long and difficult road, but the Republicans would have us believe that he said he was a magic bullet that was going to perform a Jesus-like miracle and make everything perfect after 40 days and 40 nights. Maybe Bachman can use her divine link to God and duplicate the cash in the coffers like the loaves and fishes – that must be her plan. Right after she abolishes the EPA and single-handedly adds hundreds or thousands of species to the extinct list and completely ruins the environment for all generations to come. Might as well add humans to the list if she gets in.

    41. america_lost says:

      These figures are flawed for the following reason: Social Security is not part of the Federal Budget. It is a separate account from the General Fund, and has its own source of income ("Payroll Tax"). Social Security payments go in the Social Security trust fund, and should NOT be counted as general revenue. The fact that this is not noted in this diagram leads me to question the rest of the diagrams and their figures.

      Is Social Security part of the first graph too? It cites sources, but does not explicitly break out the numbers. It would really behoove the public to look at numbers themselves, rather than just assuming what they are shown to be truly representational.

    42. Carl says:

      HOW CAN YOU CALL SOCIALSECURITY ENTITLEMENTS? We have paid into this our whole lives!
      I guess it's like the REPUBLICANS lying and calling it SPIN!!!

    43. gfqeiu says:

      Obama added the wars to his budget (which Bush never did) and he has faced a drop in tax receipts due to the recession while at the same time having to pay for additional unemployment … nothing to do with spending. Why are we wasting our time making arguments that have nothing to do with reality? We have lost the ability to argue from a basis of facts and have instead become a country that argues from an ideological talking point.

    44. Guest1234 says:

      It would be nice if you at least pretended to be neutral. Media apologists? Stimulus spending binge? And then you pretend that the deficit for 2007 before the recession shows how reasonable the Bush budgets were, but of course it's the recession that has made the budget deficits soar more than any other thing. (Similarly, it's not that Clinton's budget surplus was because of his amazing fiscal abilities; he lucked into soaring revenues in a boom economy.) Finally, you are ready to throw Obama off the cliff because the federal debt is predicted to go up 100% in 10 years, not mentioning that it went up 180% (180%!) in Reagan's 8 years. Reagan's doing worse doesn't make Obama better, but it is good to have perspective. I came here looking for another perspective on a graph circulating among liberal friends that shows Obama and Clinton's raising the debt less than any Republican Prez in 30 years. I don't trust that graph because it seems "too good to be true" from a liberal perspective, so I wanted to find an alternate voice. Apparently, this wasn't a much more trustworthy location.

    45. pyrillix says:

      I can believe the idiocy of these libs, lets see "Bush spent way too much so Obama has to spend 4 times as much to make things better..", makes sense to me…

    46. kushibo says:

      When calculating that Bush's deficit was "only" $160 billion in the year 2007, did you take into account the budget gimmicks used by Bush to make the deficit seem quite a bit smaller?

      More to the point:
      Specifically, they argue that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, and the recession are all to blame for today’s deficits. It’s an argument we heard before from Obama since the days of his campaign, and it’s an argument that is as flawed today as it was then. One simple number explains it well: the budget deficit figure in 2007, the last Bush year prior to the recession. The tax cuts were in full effect, both wars were raging, and the recession had not yet struck, yet the budget deficit in 2007 was $160 billion, or about a tenth of Obama’s deficit this year.

      If Obama supporters are saying that the recession is (partly) to blame for the current deficit, how does using a pre-recession Bush figure "explain it well" that this is a flawed argument? You'd have to compare something a bit later than that. At least The Heritage Foundation isn't doing what other Obama critics are doing and suggesting that Obama is responsible for the 2008 and 2009 budgets.

    47. Sam says:

      I think he forgot to account for the fact that one must spend money to make money. I mean all this reasoning that obama spent all this money is true but what's the reason he spent all this money? Because of the deficit That W created. If only the republicans and liberals could agree on things so we can fix this damn country and stop rejecting everything that the opposite party says. There's why we can't fix the deficit, because everything the liberals put out the republicans automatically reject and vice versa. Partially because they try to throw things about abortion in there and things like that. If we can fix that and not have the congress mess around and act like little children, maybe we can start on our way to fixing the economy and ultimately the deficit

    48. B Harris says:

      Only those of us who are emotionally and ideologically divorced from both political viewpoints will ever be able to dispassionately analyze the data to arrive at some version of "truth".

      The rest of you (left and right) are too vested in your particular world view to accept contradictory data.

      For instance, this graph demonstrates that all kinds of administrations and congresses over the past 30 years have been culpable.

      Far too easy to just blame to other guy though. Keeps that pesky logic thing from getting in the way of emotions.

    49. DavidB says:

      What a horrible load of propaganda nonsense. Anybody who has ever worked for a paycheck knows that SS & Medicare are deducted from their paychecks – and are paid for separately. And there is plenty of money in the SS trust fund at present time. These entitlement programs are not adding to the deficit at all – with the exception of the Bush Medicare Part D – which was passed without making any provisions for paying for it. Also, the deficit numbers under Bush that are quoted ignores the fact that Bush kept the 2 wars off of the budget and those numbers do not reflect the amount the wars added to the deficit. Obama added the cost of the wars back into the budget. Anybody who believes this crock of cooked up crapola is not very bright at all.

      • A Rationalist says:

        the problem is that government has taken the social security trust and spent it. that means that when social security needs to pay out its benefits, then the government has to borrow money to pay social security back. that is mandated by social security law. you are correct that social security is funded by payroll taxes.

    50. B.O.'s DISASTROUS plan: COLOSSAL BUDGET DEFICITS as far as the eye can see!! Check out these visuals.

    51. Lynda Deming says:

      To be fair, EVERY President has inherited these programs since their inception. President Bush did offer "remedial action" explaining that these entitlement programs were going to explode once the first baby boomer began to collect. He was faught tooth and nail by many in his own party.

      I do have one question … of the $454 billion deficit that is shown for 2008, is the $350 billion from TARP that was charged to President Bush included in that figure? If so, does that mean that he had the deficit down to $104 billion before the orchestrated financial terrorist attack on our economy in September 2008?

    52. Mr. Obama… you cannot be considered successful as president by going against the people and the Constitution you swore to uphold!

    53. Shelley Peck says:

      If the writer were truly honest and not biased, he would know that Social Security is a self-contained program and does NOT contribute one dime to the the National Debt.

    54. IndependentA says:

      In fairness, wouldn't these graphs look essentially the same no matter who was president? The programs driving our spending have been put in place over the course of several generations. The deficits are not being driven by new programs put in place by Obama. These programs are, as envisioned, costing more (especially entitlements). Couple this with the fact that Obama took office in the midst of 11 million job losses and the fact that we cut taxes while engaging in two wars, expanding medicare…. I'm not saying more shouldn't be done to get this under control. It should. We need to cut spending and get more revenue to balance this. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying to you. And blaming these current high deficits on one guy who stepped into a bear trap is just intellectually dishonest. You can't blame a guy who agreed to captain the Titanic after it hit the iceberg for hitting the iceberg, too. There is plenty of blame to go around, including on this president, but the blame placed on President Obama should be proportional to the responsibility. The bulk of the blame should be directed at both parties over the course of decades.

    55. independent1 says:

      So you'll be asking blue collar, red state workers in the Bible belt to give up their social security benefits? They're on board for that but not for closing corporate tax loopholes. Propaganda is propaganda no matter who's creating the charts. Wake up people and stop towing (either) party line.

    56. Ann Mancusa says:

      I guess it's true. The most intelligent population of this great country reside in blue states. Please read how former President Bush destroyed President Clinton's deficit within four months of taking office. Medicare and Social Security are not entitlements. I paid into both for nearly forty years. If the Republicans misappropriated my tax dollars, the fault lies and stops with the Republican Party and their Conservative followers.

    57. Geo Elbel says:

      Love facts and documented sources !!!

    58. Alex says:

      Well So far our deficit has gone from 13.6 in 2010 to 13.2 in 2011. Which makes your chart way off. Plus in 2012 is down to 11.0 which makes your "projection" 22% incorrect. Not impressive.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.