Skip to comments.Federal deficit now lowest in 4 years
Posted on 10/11/2006 7:25:30 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Federal deficit now lowest in 4 years
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer 4 minutes ago
The federal budget deficit, helped by a gusher of tax revenues, fell to $247.7 billion in 2006, the smallest amount of red ink in four years.
The deficit for the budget year that ended Sept. 30 was 22 percent lower than the $318.7 billion imbalance for 2005, handing President Bush an economic bragging point as Republicans go into the final four weeks of a battle for control of Congress.
Both spending and tax revenues climbed to all-time highs. The sharp narrowing of the deficit reflected the fact that revenues climbed by 11.7 percent, outpacing the 7.3 percent increase in spending.
The 2006 deficit was far lower than the $423 billion figure the administration had projected last February and also represented an improvement from a July revised estimate of $295.8 billion.
It was the smallest deficit since a $159 billion imbalance in 2002, a shortfall that came after four straight years of budget surpluses, the longest stretch that the government had finished in seven decades.
Since that time, the government has recorded three of the biggest deficits in history in dollar terms including an all-time record of $413 billion in 2004.
The reason for the improvement this year was the big jump in revenues, propelled by strong economic strongth.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Too bad we're spending like a drunken sailor or there would be nearly no deficit. Thx Repubs!
It's that big a deal when you're only comparing it against yourself. I mean, fine, it's down compared to your bigger spending years. Fine.
sorry, meant to say not that big a deal. how does the deficit compare to, say, the 1990s?
War does create "drunken sailors".
But seriously, this dramatic reduction in the deficit is great news, news that should be touted in the MSM, but you won't see me holding my breath waiting, or for the MSM to give credit to Bush tax cuts.
So spending and tax revenues are outpacing economic growth at least two to one. That doesn't sound so great to me.
Is there any relevant comparison there?
To be true to our principles, we should have let Alqueda overrun the country, instead. /sarc
Wow! The AP story just a few hours ago said the 2006 deficit was $250 B..and now its down to $247.7B In just a few short hour's time.
WWII did so legitimately, but GWB was a big spender long before the current war, which takes up only a tiny fraction of the GDP that WWII did.
Compared to seriously big wars, this ones a pimple on our buttocks. No excuse.
> Too bad we're spending like a drunken sailor or there would be nearly no deficit. Thx Repubs!
Yep. I'm not impressed that the spendthrift jerks in Congress are only losing money at the shocking rate of 4 years ago, and not the ludicrous rate of last year.
Not that the Democrats would do any better, but dang-- we're supposed to be the party of fiscal solvency. What a joke.
But...I thought the tax cuts were supposed to be BAD for revenues!!!
The so called "four years of surplus" fairy tale repeated here is part of the standard Clinton legacy building, and is nonsense.
The surplus only existed because of the absurd accounting rules used by Congress and the President. If more rational accounting rules were used, say those that required for incuding future pension liabilities (like, for instance the rules the Government requires OTHER big entities like GM and Ford to use) then the so-called "surplus" would have been revealed as a very deep deficit.
I was gratified to see this finally admitted this summer in a front page USA Today story.
Anyone can verify this easily be visiting the Bureau of the Public Debt. You will note that despite (two, three, four!!) years of Clintonian "surplus" the actual debt of the USA increased EACH AND EVERY YEAR of his era of cheap sex in the White House.
I now return control of your screen to the lying MSM and their sock-puppet reporters. (Economics reporter! HA!)
Puppet shows and games for hurrican non-victims: $22.6 million
I'm with you. A $247.7 billion dollar deficit is nothing to celebrate. It just brings us to hell at a little slower rate than lets say a $450 billion dollar deficit.
I'm stuned. I didn't know we had any strongth.
Anyone care to guess how the mainstream media is going to play this:
If you guessed, "They'll say that Republicans only claim that tax cuts led to higher revenues, and it's all temporary anyway..."
Come on down!! You've won today's grand prize on "Dinosaur Media Showcase"! (Tell 'em what he won, Sandy... )