WASHINGTON (CNN) — President Bush’s budget chief blamed the faltering economy and the bipartisan stimulus package for the record $482 billion deficit the White House predicted for the 2009 budget year.
Jim Nussle, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, said the deficit would be about 3.3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product, the measure of the nation’s total economy.
The fiscal year begins October 1, 2008.
The federal deficit is the difference between what the government spends and what it takes in from taxes and other revenue sources. The government must borrow money to make up the difference.
While the deficit would be a record in absolute dollar terms, Nussle said it would be below the 2004 deficit, 3.6 percent of GDP, and the record deficit of 1983, 6 percent of GDP, when compared with the size of the overall U.S. economy.
Now one needs to remember this is without including the money for Bush’s War or the one in Afghanistan.
For those who can’t say you can blame an economy on one person, you are right. However, when that one person embodies a political ideology and follows through with that, and it tanks, horribly, you can hold him and it fully responsible.
Read more for why that is…
President Bush inherited a budget surplus of $128 billion when he took office in 2001 but has since posted a budget deficit every year. View a history of the government deficits and surpluses »
The Bush administration has spent heavily on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and faces a large budget shortfall in tax revenue in part because of Bush’s tax cuts and a souring economy.
A Democratic point man on the budget, Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota, blasted the administration for its “reckless fiscal policies,” blaming the president’s tax cuts for driving the government into deficit and saying Bush “will be remembered as the most fiscally irresponsible president in our nation’s history.” Watch Conrad call the federal debt Bush’s legacy »
Now, this brings us the the Next President, Obama or McCain (if you’ve been sleeping for the last six months, or training for the Olympic Opening Ceremonies underground). They will have to deal with this huge deficit, a weak currency, and two wars.
Oh, and about a quarter of the country is going to retire in 2-3 years.
What this means to me, and I’m sorry to make it so damn obvious, but we are going to need to pay for a bunch of things. Our economic growth has been hollowed out by the banking and mortgage shennangans. The idea of “growing our way out of it” went along with these companies. When you cut tax and have negative growth you don’t get more revenues, you borrow more money (which China uses to put on an amazing show).
Ultimately what I’m saying is then idea of cutting more taxes is kinda weird at this point. Bush was the first President to cut taxes and then go to war. Now we see how that turned out. Expanding that idiotic policy for four more years is…uh…idiotic.