Skip to main content

Congressional Budget Office charts forecast the growth of real GDP and the unemployment rate for 2013-2023.
The Congressional Budget Office released its 10-year forecast for the economy Tuesday. You can read a condensed version here. The news that is getting the most headline attention in the report is the fact that the annual deficit will fall in 2013 below a trillion dollars—an estimated $845 billion—for the first time since 2008. That's 5.3 percent of gross domestic product, half of what it was in 2009 compared to the size of the economy then. Assuming federal budget policies were to remain the same, the deficit would continue to fall for several years, reaching 2.4 percent of the GDP in 2015, before starting a slow rise again in 2016, the CBO says.

What's not getting as much headline attention is what Brian Beutler points out: The counterproductive obsession with cutting the deficit has worked to do just that but "at the expense of the still-struggling economy":

“[E]conomic activity will expand slowly this year, with real GDP growing by just 1.4 percent,” according to CBO’s projections. “That slow growth reflects a combination of ongoing improvement in underlying economic factors and fiscal tightening that has already begun or is scheduled to occur-including the expiration of a 2 percentage-point cut in the Social Security payroll tax, an increase in tax rates on income above certain thresholds, and scheduled automatic reductions in federal spending. That subdued economic growth will limit businesses’ need to hire additional workers, thereby causing the unemployment rate to stay near 8 percent this year, CBO projects.”
The most recent government report puts the official unemployment rate at 7.9 percent. (Critics, including me, have argued since the Bush administration that the official rate severely understates the true unemployment situation.) And while the official rate had fallen to 7.8 percent last September, CBO does not expect it to drop below 7.5 percent before 2015. It has been 70 years since the last time the United States experienced an unemployment rate that high for longer than six consecutive years.

A key reason for failing to reduce unemployment faster is because of fiscal belt-tightening and tax adjustments. That includes the reinstatement of the 2 percent payroll tax cut that affects consumer spending and cuts in government spending. The latter sent GDP growth for the fourth quarter of 2012 into negative territory for the first time in three and a half years, the government reported last week. Most of the reduced spending was defense-related. Read more about the CBO's report below.

Federal Debt held by the public
Once the nation "adjusts" to the fiscal tightening mandated by current law, the CBO states, it forecasts growth will expand from the 1.4 percent predicted for 2013 to 3.4 percent in 2014 and 3.6 percent annually from 2015 through 2018:
"The effects of the housing and financial crisis will continue to fade and that an upswing in housing construction (though from a very low level), rising real estate and stock prices, and increasing availability of credit will help to spur a virtuous cycle of faster growth in employment, income, consumer spending, and business investment over the next few years."
But growth in inflation-adjusted GDP isn't expect to bring unemployment down to 5.5 percent until the end of 2017. That would still be more than a full point higher than it was in mid-2007.
For the second half of the coming decade, CBO does not attempt to predict the cyclical ups and downs of the economy; rather, CBO assumes that GDP will stay at its maximum sustainable level. On that basis, CBO projects that both actual and potential real GDP will grow at an average rate of 2¼ percent a year between 2019 and 2023. That pace is much slower than the average growth rate of potential GDP since 1950. The main reason is that the growth of the labor force will slow down because of the retirement of the baby boomers and an end to the long-standing increase in women’s participation in the labor force. CBO also projects that the unemployment rate will fall to 5.2 percent by 2023 and that inflation and interest rates will stay at about their 2018 levels throughout the 2019–2023 period.
The CBO report also estimates how big a percentage of GDP the federal debt will be over the next 10 years, setting it for the second half of the decade in the 73 percent range, the highest it has been since 1950.

Of course, all of these CBO forecasts, even the ones for the immediate future, are subject to what could very well be major changes in spending and taxing policies.

Originally posted to Daily Kos Economics on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:09 PM PST.

Also republished by Money and Public Purpose and Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Growth Requires Investment (13+ / 0-)

    Whether you are a business or a government. And investment has to come from revenue or borrowing (for both) or by printing money (if you are the government). If we want a stagnant, weak or shrinking economy forever, starving government of the ability to invest in growth is the way to go.

    "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

    by bink on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:29:09 PM PST

    •  Commie. ;) n/t (9+ / 0-)

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:32:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Broadly Frustrated (6+ / 0-)

      But I'm broadly frustrated by the inability of our government to set forth a vision for the future of this country -- in terms of economy, in terms of jobs and in terms of quality of life -- and then create policy that helps us get there.

      It often seems like government has lost faith in the ability of government to do its own job.

      "I'll believe that corporations are people when I see Rick Perry execute one."

      by bink on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:33:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was thinking about this (0+ / 0-)

        Imagine if, tomorrow, President Obama decided it was important that we return to the moon. Nothing new, just a mission to send 2 or 3 human beings to land on the moon.

        Given the current political climate, the boondoggle that aerospace contracting has become, and the general lack of leadership that permeates all aspects of our society, I see absolutely no way that we could pull it off in less than 10 years.

        Small varmints, if you will.

        by aztecraingod on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:33:32 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  None of our leaders want to talk about it (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Nelson

        I just heard James Patterson talking on Rev. Al Sharpton's show.  He was talking about all the "progressive" issues that liberal Dems should help Obama advance now that Obama has taken an interest in them.

        His talking points included gun law reform, education spending, environmental reform and a few other things, but made no mention of the most important issue of all: economic recovery and jobs.

        Are they just being obtuse?

        According to the latest polls, Americans still consider the economy to be the #1 problem in the US

        From the latest CNN poll:

        "Which of the following is the most important issue facing the country today? The economy. The federal budget deficit. Health care. Gun policy. Foreign policy. Immigration. The environment."

         The economy     46%                  

        The federal budget deficit  23%                  

        Health care   14%                 

        Gun policy 6%                  

        Foreign policy     4%                  

        Immigration  3%                  

        The environment   2%                  

        Other (vol.)     1%

        Link

        That's not to say policy priorities should always be governed by popular opinion, but when nearly half of Americans think the economy/jobs should be the number one priority, someone in DC should pay attention.

        I continue to get the feeling that our own Dem leaders in DC don't want to talk about the crappy economy.  They seem to be avoiding the problem like the plague.

        Democratic Leaders must be very clear they stand with the working class of our country. Democrats must hold the line in demanding that deficit reduction is done fairly -- not on the backs of the elderly, the sick, children and the poor.

        by Betty Pinson on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:01:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  As you know, I think the economy... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          quill, Calgacus

          ...and jobs are extremely important, too. But it is beyond sad where the majority places environmental matters, which, of course, includes the issues of global warming, which, I personally believe, is the most important issue of our time.

          Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

          by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:11:40 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  What inaugural address? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        quill, Calgacus

        It appears that emptier words were never spoken. It's as if it never happened. By offering to cut entitlement spending for no good reason to achieve an unnecessary compromise, he's directly going against what he said on 1/21/13.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:05:58 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Investing != Spending (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calgacus

      Though, obviously, you have to spend to invest.

      I wonder if the government can do anything at all effectively with regards to the economy.  Congress seems unable to pass a single purpose bill, which means that any effort at stimulus will get a million other things larded in with it, things that provide little, if any, actual stimulus.

      But...it will be the xxxx billion stimulus bill that delivers only yy jobs.

      LG: You know what? You got spunk. MR: Well, Yes... LG: I hate spunk!

      by dinotrac on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:02:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  If you want a growth and productivity-based (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ratcityreprobate, bink, Calgacus

      economy, then this is what you do. If you want a financially parasitic extractive economy, then this is not what you do, as it misdirects money from short-term capital gains to long-term investment capital. These people are basically raiding our seed corn to fill their larders, for no other reason than that they get off on it, and need to have bragging rights at Davos.

      And Obama likes them. Wants to be one of them. Scary.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:04:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  If this PEW poll is right we are in trouble... (5+ / 0-)

    ...because 67% of Democrats (and 84% of Republicans) think that reducing the deficit is a priority.

    Pew Poll photo Pewpoll_zps33b89732.png

    Unless it becomes clear that doing only that will plunge the economy into a second dip of "great" recession it will probably happen.

    On the other hand if jobs are given priority (Dems support this 84% and Repubs 77%) we may have a chance.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 01:33:19 PM PST

    •  Pew is wrong, CNN poll says the opposite (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, Eric Nelson

      from my comment above, CNN's poll from Jan. 14-15 shows the number one priority is economy - 46% of Americans.  

      The deficit/fiscal cliff wars have been covered less in the media, leaving voters to focus more on their own personal needs and opinions as opposed to what the GOP tells them they should be worried about.

      Democratic Leaders must be very clear they stand with the working class of our country. Democrats must hold the line in demanding that deficit reduction is done fairly -- not on the backs of the elderly, the sick, children and the poor.

      by Betty Pinson on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:05:21 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This is a silly poll (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shockwave, Eric Nelson, Odysseus

      Instead of asking people to rank priorities, it asked them to list all of them regardless of order. But even then, people still want to protect entitlements and improve education more than lower the deficit.

      This is one area where public opinion should be taken with a grain of salt, because the public tends to want contradictory things when it comes to spending. You can't do all the things it wants to do.

      "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

      by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:08:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The rotten RW Rs are accomplishing their (6+ / 0-)

    Mission, the destruction of us; austerity does not create prosperity.

    We have a jobs deficit, but that's on purpose also, because the evil 1%!don't need us to work for them to make money.

    •  It seems logical that Dems in DC should push back (0+ / 0-)

      We need to get our own leaders to put forth an economic plan to reduce unemployment at a much faster pace.

      Democratic Leaders must be very clear they stand with the working class of our country. Democrats must hold the line in demanding that deficit reduction is done fairly -- not on the backs of the elderly, the sick, children and the poor.

      by Betty Pinson on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:06:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The next Repub President will get to spend (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bink, Dem Beans, coffejoe

    spend, spend and all of a sudden "deficits won't matter" again as they'll give handouts to all the GOP special interests and cut taxes on the rich to run up a huge deficit again.  

    Pres Obama should have made the case for more spending now - but he has been sucked into the "spending is bad, we need to balance budget by 2016" garbage.  He's basically resigned himself to be the clean up guy for the Bush years.  And then he leaves office and the next Republican (Or another Clinton and all Bil's disaster conservative bills) comes back in and bends over for big business and the rich again.  

    Keystone XL Pipeline - Canada gets the money, Asia gets the oil, America gets the toxic refinery pollution and potential for a pipeline leak ecological disaster.

    by Jacoby Jonze on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 02:13:49 PM PST

    •  He wasn't sucked in... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ferg

      he has always been fiscally conservative...and was pulled in further by the likes of Peter Orzag...the question is has he been shocked into action....

      "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

      by justmy2 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:11:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fiscal conservatism is for three kinds of people (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        howd, dorkenergy, Calgacus

        Idiots

        Rich people who stand to profit from it

        Politicians and pundits either beholden to them, or too weak to oppose them, and obsessed with the desire to be seen as a Very Very Serious Person

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:00:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Do elites have to care about unemploymt anymore? (6+ / 0-)

    It appears to be the case that the increasing insecurity, dropping wage and benefit levels, and extended unemployment suffered by a huge section of the American population has proven to be no major priority or fear for our political system.

    Maybe they feel we can be comfortably transitioned to the 1970s-80s South American / Caribbean model of gleaming development in upper-class areas and shanty-town / brute worker peripheries.

    Hard to say.

  •  No one could have predicted... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson, xxdr zombiexx

    way to go blue dogs, Republicans, POTUS and Peter Orzag and third way...

    Interestingly, folks like Joe Scarborough are now making Keynesian noise, but refuse to call it Keynesian...

    2017 until full employment...and we are busy talking about nonsense for 2 years because of Bill Daley and a bipartisanship fetish that took until late 2011 to disavow...

    "Small Businesses Don't Build Levees" - Melissa Harris Perry

    by justmy2 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:07:47 PM PST

  •  So Keep defense cuts scheduled to take.. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, xxdr zombiexx

    ..effect in March (budget control act) until an accurate accounting of actual military expenditures is completed.

    The Trickery of the Military Budget - February 2, 2013

    A key federal budget trick is using words to confuse citizens, such as labeling U.S. military spending as “defense” though much is for “offense” and sliding costs for wounded soldiers under “veterans affairs” and nuclear bombs under “energy,” as ex-CIA analyst Paul R. Pillar explains.
    And leave out the 25 percent cut in Medicare’s payment rates for physicians and many other programs until defense spending is straightened out.
    The figure most often cited is the “base” budget of the Department of Defense, which was $535 billion for FY2012. But military and defense expenditures go well beyond that, including such things as the development of nuclear weapons, which is done in the Department of Energy, or training of foreign military forces, which come under the international affairs section of the federal budget.

    Add in all those other things and the total is more like $930 billion rather than $535 billion. And that’s just current expenditures, not taking into account follow-on effects such as additional interest to be paid on the national debt.

    Probably the most egregious bit of military-related budgetary legerdemain has been the practice of keeping the operational costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan separate from the main Pentagon budget, as if those costs should not count as much because they are, well, sort of temporary. And so the base budget figure continues to get cited as “defense spending” even though it excludes the main, and costliest, activities in recent years of the U.S. military.

    It sounds like GOP slashing public employess for 4 years caused just what they hoped for. it will take a year at least until the economy begins to takes off.
  •  And never forget that a lot of the job losses (3+ / 0-)

    are among state and local employees, who continue to lose jobs as budgets are tightened.

    •  Still recovering from a republican-caused (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson, Meteor Blades

      layoff of a government-based mental health center job.

      I am re-employed now, after 8 years (laid off June 2002 - finally  got a real job in April 2010) and obtaining a professional licence I am now making just a bit less than I as 10 years ago, without health insurance. I have been re-employed now nearly 3 years and you don't get over a huge layoff in a few paychecks.

      I just managed to buy some glasses for the first time in 12 years.

      And it is always easier for me, no matter how rough it was/is - Delivering pizza, working for criminals, not getting paid)   so many other people just got devastated so I imagine they may never get out of the hole. Not without help.

      The effort being put into NOT helping them is..how can you not call it evil?

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:33:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Then why does Obama continue to support (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pluto, Mike Taylor

    the nonsense that our deficit is anywhere near our biggest problem AND can only be dealt with by including serious entitlement spending cuts in the mix? Anyone who knows anything about the economy knows that this is complete and utter nonsense, and Obama is way too smart to not know this too.

    Why then does he continue to play along? Either he's obsessed with optics, with being seen a Very Serious Person even though this is the exact opposite of that--and only a foolish person does that--or else he's operating out of fear and caution, being led by fools and crooks rather than leading them.

    And spare me the 11DC silliness. It's insulting.

    This makes no sense economically. It makes no sense politically. It only makes sense from the perspective of someone who who sees himself as President of the Very Serious Person's Club, not the USA. I didn't vote for that guy.

    Apparently, though, Pete Peterson did.

    "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

    by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 03:57:23 PM PST

    •  Meanwhile (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Meteor Blades

      the oceans keep rising

      Small varmints, if you will.

      by aztecraingod on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:01:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  There's news on that: (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Eric Nelson
      Obama calls on Congress to avert sequester

      CBS

      With just three weeks until a far-reaching set of spending cuts are scheduled to go into effect, President Obama today urged Congress to pass a stopgap measure aimed at staving off more than $1 trillion worth of reductions, calling for a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reforms he said would help avoid putting the economy in jeopardy from "self-inflicted wounds."

      ::

      "The threat of massive, automatic cuts has already started to affect business decisions. So we've been reminded that while it's critical for us to cut wasteful spending, we can't just cut our way to prosperity."

      ::

      In the final hours of 2012, Congress passed a short-term deal to avert the so-called sequester, a $1.2 trillion package of across-the-board spending cuts, spread equally over defense and domestic non-defense spending over the course of 10 years. But that deal expires on March 1, and Congress now faces yet another round of painstaking negotiations over a way to avert cuts that many say would devastate the economy. At the same time, Congress is also digging into negotiations for a bill to fund the government, the funding for which runs out on March 27.

      Mr. Obama today pushed Congress to pass an unspecified package of smaller spending cuts, combined with tax reforms made by closing corporate loopholes, that would buy Congress time to come up with a more comprehensive solution through a bipartisan budget process.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/...



      Denial is a drug.

      by Pluto on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:06:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He needs to decide what he wants (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Pluto, xxdr zombiexx

        He can't have it both ways, boldly defending the social safety net and calling for putting investment in our future above short-term deficit mania in the inaugural, then saying that unnecessary, stupid and cruel entitlement cuts are on the table to Boehner doesn't haz a sad. He needs to decide who he wants to please, Boehner, Peterson and DC pundits, or the American people and actual economists. I'm sick of him trying to have it both ways because he needs to be a pleaser. Leadership means making tough AND smart decisions in order to serve the greater good. He's not doing any of this here.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:14:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Good question (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      xxdr zombiexx, howd

      The Dem talking points coming out of DC these days studiously ignore the problems with our economy, with high unemployment.

      I can't fathom why they think its a good idea to ignore the problem, but that's what they seem to be doing.

      Democratic Leaders must be very clear they stand with the working class of our country. Democrats must hold the line in demanding that deficit reduction is done fairly -- not on the backs of the elderly, the sick, children and the poor.

      by Betty Pinson on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:08:24 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The thing is that Obama HAS spoken out (0+ / 0-)

        on what's actually wrong with the economy, and what needs to be done to fix it. But he's also repeated CW nonsense about getting our fiscal house in order blah blah blah. It's like he wants to be liked by both sides of this issue. But you can't. He either does the right thing, or he does what Pete Peterson wants.

        He can't do both.

        "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

        by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:17:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Upton Sinclair Explains Why (0+ / 0-)

        Upton Sinclair explains it quite well:

        It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
        The 1% and corporations are doing quite well with high unemployment.  Record profits and rising incomes and wealth.

        Unfortunately, Democrats are owned by the 1% just like the Republicans, it's just that the Democrats get to be the good cop and pretend to care about working Americans.

        Poor man wants to be rich. Rich man wants to king. And the king ain't satisifed until he rules everything. B.Springsteen

        by howd on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:38:22 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think that there are other reasons (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          howd

          for why Obama is so hell-bent on cutting entitlements and the deficit at a time when we shouldn't be doing either. I don't think that he's "owned" by anyone. As a future ex-president, he can write his ticket and doesn't need patronage. Sure, it doesn't hurt to keep up good relations with the future donors to his presidential library and whatever causes he decides to take up, but he doesn't need to kiss up to them to do that, only to give them a seat at the table so that they don't feel snubbed and left out (these people are VERY vain).

          I think that he's doing this because one, he wants to be seen as "serious", and these days that means cutting entitlements and the deficit. Which makes him weak and vain himself, because he should know better. But he doesn't want Tom Friedman or Pete Peterson to dismiss him as one of those utopian liberals--thus the weakness and vanity.

          And two, I think he's bought into the Puritan and Victorian attitude that unless you're extremely unfortunate, your success, or lack thereof, is largely your own fault, and he's doing everyone a favor by tightening their belts a bit, as a sort of tough love to get you off your butt. He probably believes that his amazing success is completely his own doing, and not the product of some amazing luck as well (like running against really weak opponents). So if others aren't doing so well, it's probably their fault, and they need to buck up and work harder.

          Now, if was reluctantly willing to cut entitlements because he felt that it was politically unavoidable, that would be one thing. But I think that he really wants to cut them for its own sake, as what he views is good policy. And the only way I can see him believing that is if he believes in this self-reliance horseshit. And it is horseshit, but no matter how hard they work, lots of people are falling behind. Not everyone is as talented and lucky as him.

          "Liberty without virtue would be no blessing to us" - Benjamin Rush, 1777

          by kovie on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 07:38:42 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Everybody knows... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    xxdr zombiexx

    That CBO stands for Communist Budgeting Office.  

    Sheesh.

  •  So, what do you think will happen with (0+ / 0-)

    ... sequestration cuts?

    Do you think they will be fully postponed?

    Or, will a tiny token of cuts go through -- just harming Americans slightly?

    Or, will they move ahead and destroy the US economy altogether?



    Denial is a drug.

    by Pluto on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:00:15 PM PST

    •  Repubs seem dead-set on destroying the economy. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Pluto

      The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

      by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:15:57 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Before they expatriate because black president? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        xxdr zombiexx



        Denial is a drug.

        by Pluto on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:22:44 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  before - they are blaming it on him (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pluto

          Please don't get my hopes up about them leaving....

          The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

          by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:24:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  White flight (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            xxdr zombiexx
            According to Bob Adams, CEO of New Global Initiatives, one and a half million U.S. households are preparing to move out of the U.S. The vast majority of émigrés are in their 20s, 30s and 40s—not the older retired crowd. And we are not talking about the next major deployment of National Guard units to the Middle East. In fact, none of the emigrants are government workers or corporate employees leaving for temporary overseas assignments. This is a group of malcontents and adventurers. This news comes from a 2011 Zogby International poll of 115,000 Americans conducted from 2009 to 2011.
            A recent Barron’s article, written by Bob Adams, breaks down the Zogby/New Global Initiatives data as follows:

            1.6 million (U.S. households) have already made the decision to leave;
            1.8 million are seriously considering and likely to leave;
            7.7 million are somewhat serious about leaving and may do so;
            3 million are seriously considering purchase of non-U.S. property;
            10 million are somewhat serious about purchase of non-U.S. property.

            Adding it all up, according to Mr. Adams, some 10% of all U.S. households are looking to leave the country, while another 11% are considering living outside the U.S. at least part-time.

            This trend was up from 2009, so what changed? Let us look at the breakdown of the American population by age group. Those from 25 to 34 years of age are young adults, some 42,000,000 of them. They are among the most energetic, innovative and creative Americans. They go where they feel the jobs and excitement are. Mr. Adam’s wider research indicated a growing interest in Asia and Latin America, less so in Europe. Asia and Latin America have growing economies while Europe is stagnate like America.

            In 2009, less than 1% of this age group was actually in the planning stages of relocation. In 2011, it was 5.1%. While the 35-to-54 and 55-to-69 age groups also set new highs, it is those aged 25 to 34 who are the major factor in the increase of interest. Behind them, the 18-to-24 age group includes many still in school or unable to find jobs. Those “seriously interested and likely to relocate” and those “somewhat interested and may relocate” rose to 39.6%. In other words, nearly 40% of that age group has turned their minds toward leaving the U.S., whether or not they can afford it right now. In 2007, that total was just over 15%.



            Denial is a drug.

            by Pluto on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:32:54 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I caught this article on Farrakhen's website (0+ / 0-)

              (I know, I know -- but the author is a PHd. anthropologist.)

              After America’s first Black President was re-elected to almost 1 million or more Americans have signed petitions on the White House website (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/) asking to secede from the Union.

              While it has been hard to get Black people, who have suffered for over 400 years under White leadership, to even think about “separation,” many White people simply cannot take another 4 years of living in this country under a Black President.

              At first these calls for separation or secession were overlooked or ignored by the mainstream media, but now governors of states like Texas and Tennessee have come forward to advise their constituents of the ramifications of secession from the Union.

              Many of the states that have the most petitioners are not in a good fiscal position to pull out from the Federal government, because they get more federal revenue dollars than they contribute in taxes. No federal assistance means no more upkeep for highways, interstates or bridges, no federally funded law enforcement and fire departments, no public libraries, no phone lines, no cable television, no cell phone towers, no power grids, no water lines, no mail services, no paramedics, no hospitals that accept Medicare/Medicaid funding, and the list goes on.

              After these hotheads cool down a minute, they may decide to take the route that many expatriates have taken in the last few years—leave the country.



              Denial is a drug.

              by Pluto on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:39:51 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Cutting is not the answer. Tax the banksters. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Nelson, xxdr zombiexx, Calgacus

    The banksters are the ones who wrecked the world economy (through their decades-long efforts in lobbying for financial-sector deregulation, which brought about the housing/real-estate bubble, then the crash), then we rescued them (when they should’ve been jumping out of skyscrapers, or in jail) at an undisclosed cost of countless trillions, mainly because of their dire economic warnings (threats) if we didn’t ‘rescue’ them (too big to fail), which still hasn’t (and won’t ever) trickle down to the general economy.
    The simplified version is: Banksters wrecked the world economy and got rewarded (‘rescued’) for it, now they want everyone else to pick up the tab (i.e. austerity).
    If there ever was an industry that needs (and deserves) the shit taxed out of them, it's the *^&%@#%$! Banksters.

    •  Tax the gambling (3+ / 0-)

      Bernie Sanders

      ..impose a financial transaction tax on the trading of stocks, bonds and derivatives. The measure would reduce gambling on Wall Street, encourage the financial sector to invest in the productive economy, and significantly reduce the deficit without harming average Americans. "This bill offers us a clear choice.  We can balance the budget on the backs of working Americans and senior citizens on fixed incomes or we can ask the gamblers on Wall Street to pay a little bit more in taxes," said Sen. Bernie Sanders,  a cosponsor of the bill.  
      [snip]
      Some of the largest and most profitable financial institutions in this country now pay little or nothing in federal income taxes.   Last year, Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS, even though it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of more than $1 trillion.  Citigroup made more than $4 billion in profits last year but paid no federal income taxes, even though it received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.  And, in 2008, Goldman Sachs paid only 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received a bailout of more than $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department
      Not only would this add billions to the treasury, but it would incentivize real investment in tangible form.
  •  Clearly, I am not an economist (4+ / 0-)

    BUT

    The news that is getting the most headline attention in the report is the fact that the annual deficit will fall in 2013 below a trillion dollars—an estimated $845 billion—for the first time since 2008.
    If the deficit IS falling NOW why are we being held hostage with bullshit rhetoric about out of control spending? (Other than that is all repubs ever do)

    The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men.

    by xxdr zombiexx on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:13:40 PM PST

  •  Deficit number (0+ / 0-)

    The new $845 bn figure presumes there will be no "doctor fix" for Medicare. How likely is that to be the case? If there is a fix, how will that affect the CBO projection?

  •  CBO --- not a great record of forecasting. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    hmi
    We will also note that the now-forecast 2013 budget deficit of $845 billion was supposed to be a deficit of just $585 billion one short year ago, a token 40%+ error rate
    ...
    Of course we should note that if we apply the same forecast error to the 2013 budget, it means the real final deficit print will be $1.2 trillion - just a tad more realistic. Finally, we will certainly note that while the CBO believes 2013 may see the first sub $1 trillion deficit in 4 years, a number which will decline modestly in the coming years, the deficit then proceeds to grow and grow and grow, until we reach 2024, at which point the US deficit returns to $1 trillion once again... and never gets smaller. And this is the optimistic version.
    http://www.zerohedge.com/...

    There's room at the top they're telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill

    by taonow on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 04:46:48 PM PST

    •  This is no praise for CBO forecasts... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Calgacus

      ... but the gold bugs and Paulistas at zerohedge don't exactly have a great record of forecasting. For four years, they've been predicting that we're in imminent danger of hyperinflation and arguing against government stimulus.

      Don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I will tell you what you believe.

      by Meteor Blades on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 05:33:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It will be interesting (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        hmi

        Since the Fed has thrown any caution to the wind, we have no idea how this will turn out. My guess, given that no reforms have happened yet ... is not good. When a government seeks to deliberately weaken the currency that is not a good thing (Japan is now trying it) - and the US is basically trying the same thing while saying all the while that it is not.

        There's room at the top they're telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill

        by taonow on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 08:01:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Are we Austeria, another European country? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calgacus

    Austerity will certainly stagnate our economy, like much of Europe.

  •  Has anybody gone and checked (0+ / 0-)

    out as to how accurate the CBO has been in the past on short term forecasts, medium term forecasts and long term forecasts? I don't believe that they have been accurate at all in any of these scenarios.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site