Good breakdown of precisely what is contributing to the deficit, by bailout type:




via Perot Charts

Category: Commodities, Taxes and Policy

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

19 Responses to “CBO Projected Deficit, by Source”

  1. super_trooper says:

    I remember the 2000 election, when Gore and Bush discussed what they would do with the projected $1T surpluss for the next 10 years. Those were the days. Maybe we could have pried open the social security lock box if Gore would have won…..
    Those were the days, now we’re trying to deal with the projected $5T in deficit for the next 10 years.

  2. 88veca says:

    George Bush… hater of surpluses. The monumental deficits over the next few years are obviously reason for alarm down the road. However, with all the extra spending piled into the government’s balance sheet, there is still a gap between public and private spending. There should be more spending for 2009 and 2010. If it means more taxes, like Robert Reich’s beloved Robin Hood tax, so be it, or if private industry would begin investing and spending all could return to normal.

    check out my blog

  3. alfred e says:

    @ST: Nice recollection. Forgot.

    Guess the surplus went to those with enough money to benefit from the capital gains tax cut. And the military war contractors like Halliburton.

    And the trickle down went where?

  4. Darmah says:

    Interesting, but does this take into account the off-budget costs of the wars for 2008, which I believe were added for 2009? or was that for 2010?

  5. Onlooker from Troy says:

    Let’s face it, the surplus was an illusion just as much as so much of the wealth created in the tech bubble was. If we had gone into the severe recession that we should have, that would have vanished.

    But we then would have been forced to face the structural problems in our economy and get on with the task of fixing things, painful as it would have been. But you really can’t think that the surplus would have persisted. That’s not realistic.

    And don’t misread me here. I am no fan of Bush, his tax cuts, or the Iraq war (the giant sucking hole).

  6. super_trooper says:

    @Onlooker from Troy, “surplus would (not) have persisted” . Clearly Bush was unable to balance the book. As for Gore…. probably would have been more likely to follow Clinton’s track record of fiscal responsibility. (i) Gore would not have started Iraq war II (ii) would not have passed Bush’s sun set tax cuts and (iii) would not have passed Medicare reform. Gore would have found other ways to spend money, but would have been less irresponsible than Bush.

  7. Greg0658 says:

    “one more time” in melody from Alan Parsons Pyramid .. green bars = Wal*Mart factory startups in China and elsewhere.
    … now if we could just get those foreign workers buying Ipods at scale and filling them with bought songs instead of clone’g / pirate’g them.

  8. James says:

    That data is stale, Barry. CBO estimates the (on-budget) deficit for the administration’s budget to be $1,825 billion. See:

  9. bound_for_the_floor says:

    Yep, James is right. That data is old. It includes a nice graph where unemployment peaks around 9 percent.
    Anyway it is nice to see the breakdown on the cost of TARP bailouts.
    So the cost is at 180 billion for TARP as of January. And Goldman only made 13 billion in revenues for q2?
    Somebody get Washington on the phone, somehow the whole 45 billion for this quarter didn’t funnel directly to GS.

  10. Marcus Aurelius says:

    Certain people should feel like complete idiots for blowing (forgive the pun) Bill Clinton’s sexual peccadillos into crimes against the Republic. Obviously, the man was the best manager and executive we’ve had in decades. What would have happened under Gore? Who knows? We do know the results of faux conservatism.

    Reminds me of the old “What If” skits on SNL. My favorite was “What if Eleanor Roosevelt would have been able to fly?” which was followed by various pundits claiming everything from the avoidance of WWII to the Axis powers taking over the world.

    To quote Rumsfield: There are things we know we know.

  11. bruerr says:

    @super_trooper agree with alfred, nice recollection, appreciate the reflection.

    @alfred, … “And the trickle down went where?” appreciate the wry humor sir.

    Barry, another good chart.

    Perot, thanks. Nice work.

  12. Onlooker from Troy says:

    Agreed MA. I don’t want to get into a long what if argument that is worthless. But those who point out the surplus have to be more honest and realize that was not sustainable, as it was built on a bubble. That’s all.

  13. Pat G. says:

    You need to find out what those guys in the CBO are smoking. Those “projected” budget deficit numbers are a pipe dream.


    I agree with your “blowing” pun. With the exception of Hillary, who cares what Clinton was doing in the oval office?

  14. James says:

    But those who point out the surplus have to be more honest and realize that was not sustainable, as it was built on a bubble. That’s all.



    The chart is based on data from the GPO:

    These are fiscal years (so, 2000 runs from Oct 1, 1999 to Sep 30, 2000) during Clinton’s terms and into Bush’s far enough to capture the impact of the bubble burst and 911.

    Blue: revenue from individual taxes
    Red: revenue from corporate taxes
    Yellow: Budget deficit
    Green: Budget deficit with Social Security surplus stripped out (the
    true deficit)

    The Nasdaq peaked in March of 2000, of course. Income tax revenue got a big boost from capital gains.

  15. nenmoonia says:

    A good portion of Bush’s term was also built on a bubble, a housing/credit bubble that was basically unprecedented in modern times. Yet he still had a huge deficit.

    Give credit where credit is due, Clinton’s surplus is stuff you can only dream of nowadays.

  16. Pat G. Says: July 16th, 2009 at 3:54 pm
    You need to find out what those guys in the CBO are smoking. Those “projected” budget deficit numbers are a pipe dream.

    yes, exactly, the CBO’s, own, Books are Cooked–so, that they’ll not even Fork, yet are Forked.

    Past that, w/this: ” But those who point out the surplus have to be more honest and realize that was not sustainable, as it was built on a bubble. That’s all.”– OfT, above..

    though, if they were fixin’ to speak the *Truth, they’d, vociferously, proclaim that, much like Dukakis’ Massachueets Mirage, WJC’s “feel good” ’90′s, was built on a set of circumstances, respectively: Tax Rates–the Higher, the Better–re: MA, and Debt Levels–then Lower, now NOT, that Neither would EVER see, the Tolerance for, or the Ability to re-Create, again..

    thx, cv, FOR the inspiration.. (:

  17. and, differently, if one cared to Understand the Powers, as they were divided, granted by The Constitution, they’s Understand, everything, about the Fact of Gingrich’s (R) -revolution in ’94..

    seriously, suck on that (D), deluded, demagogues..

  18. [...] CBO Projected Deficit, by Source | The Big Picture (tags: CBO government deficit year data graph) [...]

  19. [...] last month, the New York Times published the results of an examination from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. The report, which examined federal spending stretching back almost a decade, found that Obama [...]