Visualizing The Abyss: An Itemized Representation Of The (Endless) U.S. Budget Deficit

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
GrinandBearit's picture

Just like 40 is the new 20... trillion is the new billion.

MarketTruth's picture

And next will be quadrillion being the new trillion.

Clinteastwood's picture

Quintillion, sextillion, octillion, this octomom sex titillation stuff insures we'll never return to sound money! Fiat money debt and fractional reserve banking holds out the promise of a free lunch, money for nothing and chicks for free to the most number of people for the maximal amount of time.....until it doesn't.

Zé Cacetudo's picture

A trillion here, a trillion there, and pretty soon you're talking about real money.

Maybe in another ten years the trillions will be replaced by quadrillions.

Shameful's picture

Why wait ten years?  Come on 5 baby!

Mad Max's picture

I'm going with 5 years, unless someone gives Ben some viagra, in which case maybe 2...

phaesed's picture

So the purely Obama programs total $201 Billion so far?

LOL, I'm sure you "fiscal conservatives" (please don't miss my sarcastic, heckling tone) will scream otherwise.

Dr Horace Manure's picture

GWB entered office in 2000 as a social conservative, and left office as a conservative Socialist.

Just because we elected one asshole in 2000 doesn't mean it was okay for you to elect another asshole in 2008.

phaesed's picture

It was either social services or military services for a man who had an arranged marriage set to push his political career while he was married to another woman. Money + politics. Could you imagine Palin in office? This woman believes she will see Jesus in her lifetime. I'm happy we elected the current asshole than the old rich white war maniacal one :) (of course Ron Paul should have run though, but that's the best of all worlds)

 

Oh gee... Cramer is bullish again, LOL.

Shameful's picture

I disagree.  If only because we could hope for the old war maniac to fall ill and be replaced by Palin.  Now I do NOT like Palin in any way(standard neo-con) but she would be so hated by the Congress and Senate we would have sweet sweet gridlock.  With her and them pissing at each other not much would get through.  Sure not an ideal situation because America would continue to rot but at least the team of looters would be less unified.  Still would be ruinous to America but maybe buy another year or 2.

Gold...Bitches's picture

not to be technical, but he was elected in 2004.  He was selected in 2000 by SCOTUS.

GoodBanker's picture

^ +1107.30 = LOL

 

Good one... good call last Friday, btw. Nailed it.

Miles Kendig's picture

And some folks still say that if the SCOTUS mattered a GS alum would be serving there.  In this case I agree with them.  What difference would it have made?

Anonymous's picture

Wrong, Bush won in every recount.

PD Quig's picture

Dude,

Don't harsh their leftard buzzes. Obviously, there simply weren't enough recounts to find all the dead people and illegal aliens ballots.

Anonymous's picture

Actually, a consortium of media entities led by the NYT and AP went back and counted ALL the votes, not just the handful of districts that Gore wanted recounted.
Bush won Florida. You can look it up on the Internet.
Oh yeah, here is that chart ref'ed above. Note that the Bush numbers include the wars. Obama's are projections but are from White House and CBO not some fly by night group.
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pic...

mynhair's picture

Isn't it missing something?  Like today's budget?

JR's picture

Roubini Sees ‘Dismal” Growth as Summers Rues ‘Human Recession’

Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Nouriel Roubini, the New York University professor who anticipated the financial crisis, said the U.S. growth outlook remains “very dismal” and White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers said the economy is still mired in a “human recession.”

Speaking at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, after the U.S. reported the fastest growth in six years, their comments underscored concern that that emergency measures to rescue banks and fight the recession may be withdrawn too soon.

“The headline number will look large and big, but actually when you dissect it, it’s very dismal and poor,” Roubini said in a Jan. 30 Bloomberg Television interview following a U.S. Commerce Department report that showed economic expansion of 5.7 percent in the fourth quarter. “I think we are in trouble.”

Roubini said more than half of the growth was related to a replenishing of depleted inventories and that consumption was reliant on monetary and fiscal stimulus. As these forces ebb, the rate will slow to 1.5 percent in the second half of 2010...

He says now that while the world’s largest economy won’t relapse into recession, U.S. unemployment will rise from the current 10 percent amid “mediocre” growth.

“It’s going to feel like a recession even if technically we’re not going to be in a recession,” he said in the interview.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aqLMEUObhysc&pos=2

faustian bargain's picture

“It’s going to feel like a recession even if technically we’re not going to be in a recession,”

 

jeez...in other words, welcome to 1984.

rrbluefin's picture

We're not technically in a recession because we're in a depression :-)

 

Welcome to 1932 with 1984 overtones.

Hephasteus's picture

I'm going to one up ya. Dark ages of oppression and control with a great depression backdrop. Nobody expects the IMF inquistion.

Just admit you cheated on your taxes and we'll let you die.

Sign the confession!!

Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Hows abouts some alchemy?

Good thing 'Mericans are so productive and can pay back the debt ;)

faustian bargain's picture

At what point does the 'current recession' start belonging to the current administration? Ever?

BS Inc.'s picture

They will never take responsibility for it nor for deepening it. It's not in the Left's DNA to take responsibility for anything. It's OK, though, because at this point, they're only fooling themselves and everyone else sees through it.

Anonymous's picture

What recession? We are in a recovery, green shoots
everywhere!

ReallySparky's picture

Bargain, not sure it has to belong to the current adminstration.  Lack of change does though, and paybacks are a mofo.  I can see the ads now, O on screen, change montra going, campaign speeches recap, there are enough televised appreances to hang him now next election season.

faustian bargain's picture

I agree, it doesn't matter much who got us here, but I guess that's my problem with the chart: it looks to me like it was drawn up with the intention of shifting blame away from the current administration, at least on that 'current recession' portion.

faustian bargain's picture

...not to mention the bursting of the dot-com bubble in 2000...why not go back to Clinton? Or Reagan? In fact I think I would have preferred to see a graph going back at least to 1913.

Carl Marks's picture

It all stated with the Mad King, George III.

Master Bates's picture

Prior to Reagan, the national debt was 400-500 billion in 1975.  Most of the problem can be traced to Reagan, as this chart shows.

I know I posted it for somebody else, and it's a partisan chart, but it doesn't change the validity of the numbers.

http://billjaquette.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/natl_debt_chart.jpg

Anonymous's picture

Except that it doesn't show Clinton jacking the SSTF while he was getting blown

Anonymous's picture

Gee, I wonder who creates the budget each year (subliminal voiceover: Congress)?

Do you know what Reagan asked to do to the size of the federal government?

He was repelled at every turn by the Democrat Congress. To get the cuts he did achieve, he had to rely upon using the bully pulpit to get to the American people.

And during that time the media incessantly marketed all the "homeless" because the cruel, evil and stupid Reagan was slashing redistribution schemes.

Vis a vis Clinton: say, I wonder whether the invention of the world-wide web by Tim Berners-Lee... and the subsequent giant tech boom... had anything to do with the economic recovery during the Clinton Crime Family's years?

Anonymous's picture

Gee, I wonder who creates the budget each year (subliminal voiceover: Congress)?

Do you know what Reagan asked to do to the size of the federal government?

He was repelled at every turn by the Democrat Congress. To get the cuts he did achieve, he had to rely upon using the bully pulpit to get to the American people.

And during that time the media incessantly marketed all the "homeless" because the cruel, evil and stupid Reagan was slashing redistribution schemes.

Vis a vis Clinton: say, I wonder whether the invention of the world-wide web by Tim Berners-Lee... and the subsequent giant tech boom... had anything to do with the economic recovery during the Clinton Crime Family's years?

Anonymous's picture

Wow, and the biggest down arrow in the surplus vs. deficit is "Bush Policies"

I wonder if all the people (like doc j) who were blaming Obama in the last piece are reading this.

docj's picture

Read the thread again - I didn't blame Barry for anything that wasn't Barry's doing.

FWIW, I gave-up defending Bush when he let Teddy Kennedy write Education reform and Medicare Part D-for-Disaster.  So that's - what? - mid-2002?  Bush was a disaster - Barry is on track to be a disaster^2.

lawrence1's picture

And let us not forget how Bush privatized war and everything else under the sun.  While Obama is following most of the same policies, at least he is not the intellectual eyesore that Bush was.... and this made him even more effective as a Trojan whorse for more of the same.

As the prince says in The Leopard by Lampedussa, ¨Everything has to change in order to remain the same.¨

 

 

Anonymous's picture

So this is the same NYT that is all excited about Obama taking people's 401K retirement money and diverting them to Treasury bonds in order to prop up the gov't a little longer?

A record of excellent and unbiased advice.

http://finance.yahoo.com/retirement/article/108727/the-unloved-annuity-g...

Master Bates's picture

All you Obama bashers should look at what is the largest contributor to our current deficits.

What IS the biggest arrow downward on the chart?

DING DING DING.  Bush policies.

Did the man do anything right???

faustian bargain's picture

Am I allowed to bash both Obama and Bush? Or is that breaking some kind of rule.

Further, Bush is not in power now. Obama is, and is therefore the more relevant party to criticize at this point.

Miles Kendig's picture

Are there really two parties in American politics?

faustian bargain's picture

I was using 'party' in the 'person' sense, not the 'political party' sense. Bad choice of wording.

Miles Kendig's picture

All good after my blunder the other day concerning AIG vs the whole of the financial services disaster... :-]

waterdog's picture

American politics is a party.

BS Inc.'s picture

I see we've got a similar reaction to the logic-challenged Obama supporters who assume that if you're criticizing Obama, it must be because you thought Bush was great.

Also, from the graphic, you'd think history started with Bush as President. How much of the spending attributed to Bush was actually the detritus of moronic spending initiated by big government Presidents on the Left? I read somewhere that some of FDR's "emergency" farm programs from the Great Depression are still running, so you know that almost any program created since then is, too. No one's got the balls to cut these things off and give taxpayers a break. It's all just "empire-building", only in a government context, not a corporate context.

Master Bates's picture

The graphic clearly states that while history did not start when Bush was the president, deficits in the government budget did - and at record levels.

Government deficits add to the debt.  The debt is why our economy is fucked.

Without the deficits, our economy could recover much better, the dollar would be worth more, etc, etc.