Brilliant. Fuzzy Math.
From the folks over at Hot Air, I give you this graphic below:
Number Crunching the Federal Debt
The folks over at CNS news had a little article about our current federal debt. They pointed out that federal debt is currently $15.709 trillion.
They went on to calculate that since March 4, 2011, the federal debt has increased $1,526,126,486,886.61.
The first spending deal the White House and leaders of both parties in Congress made last year was on March 2. On that day, the president signed a continuing resolution to keep the government funded past March 4, when the previous continuing resolution, passed by a lame-duck Congress in late 2010, expired.
The March 4 CR kept the government funded for two weeks and was approved by a bipartisan 335-91 vote in the House and a bipartisan 91-9 vote in the Senate.
Since that March 4, 2011 bipartisan continuing resolution, the federal government has been funded by a series of bipartisan deals cut between the White House and congressional leaders.
They further tabulated the debt per household since the first Continuing Resolution:
Given that the Census Bureau estimates there are about 117,538,000 households in the United States, the per household increase in the federal debt since Congress enacted its March 4, 2011 bipartisan spending deal has been approximately $12,984.
This got me thinking about some more facts and figures:
If the total debt it 15,709,000,000,000.00, and there are 117,538,000 households in the United States, each household is responsible for $133,650.39.
Given that the US Population Clock records that there are 313,582,673 persons in the United States as of today, each person is responsible for $50,095.24
Given that it is estimated that 46% of households either paid no federal income tax in 2011 or will receive more from the IRS than they pay in, that means 63,470,520 households (54%) did. If you divide the entire debt per taxpaying household, each is responsible for $247,500.72 of the total debt, or an increase of $24,044.65 since last March. (14 months ago)
The next statutory limit on our debt $16.394 trillion, so we’ve got another $685 billion to go. Some have estimated the debt limit will be reached before election day, around October 15. A February 2012 study by US Senator Rob Portman, former director of the OMB, has noted that,
“Following the contentious debt ceiling last August, President Obama promised that he would take action to address the country’s fiscal crisis. He has failed to do that. In fact, his new budget increases spending and projects that Washington will be hitting the debt ceiling again in mid-October – burning through a $2.1 trillion debt limit increase in just over 14 months. This is an unfortunate but clear signal to the American people that Washington is spending too much, borrowing too much, and putting our nation’s fiscal stability at risk.
So some final calculations here.
By around Election Day, the total debt of the United States will be $16,394,000,000,000.00 ($16.394 trillion).
Based on today’s (May 20th) population numbers,
That’s $55,279.67 per person
That’s $139,478.29 per household
That’s $258,293.14 per taxpaying household
Pretty sobering.
Paul Ryan on Today’s Rejection of Obama’s Budget
BIPARTISAN AND BICAMERAL. That says it all. Obama is truly a “partisan” president.
Below is the text of the press release from the House Budget Committee regarding the newest unanimous vote to reject President Obama’s fiscal plan: House Budget Committee Press <hbcpress@mail.house.gov>
Date: Wed, May 16, 2012 at 4:52 PM
Subject: Paul Ryan on Bipartisan, Bicameral Rejection of President’s Budget: 0-513
|
|
|
| PRESS RELEASE | |
| FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE May 16, 2012 PERMALINK |
CONTACT: Conor Sweeney |
| Chairman Ryan on the Clarifying Choice Offered by U.S. Senate’s Budget Failures | |
| President Obama and his party’s leaders fail to advance solutions, prove unfit to govern | |
| WASHINGTON – On the 1,113th day since Senate Democrats last passed a budget, the U.S. Senate considered a series of budget resolutions, none authored or supported by a single Senate Democrat. The national debt has eclipsed the size of the entire U.S. economy, yet the Democrat-controlled Senate has failed to pass a budget for over three years. They chose again this year not to even propose a budget. While a series of Republican budget proposals received support today, the President’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget was rejected 0-99 – with every single Democrat and every single Republican voting against the President’s fiscal plan.In response to today’s clarifying exercise on the Senate floor today, House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan issued the following statement:“The budget votes today in the Democrat-controlled Senate reveal a clear choice of two futures: painful austerity from politicians who refuse to lead and a path to prosperity from solutions-oriented reformers. Not only does this mark the third year Senate Democrats have failed to put forward a budget, it also marks the second year in which they joined Republicans in unanimously rejecting the President’s budget. In the past two years – in the House and the Senate, the President’s budgets have received zero votes in favor and 610 votes against. It is no surprise that Democrats up for reelection want nothing to do with the President’s massive increases in spending, taxing and borrowing. The fact that no Senate Democrat has voted in favor of a single budget resolution on the Senate floor in over three years is among the most embarrassing spectacles in Washington. “I thank Senate Budget Committee Ranking Member Jeff Sessions for his leadership on fiscal issues, and I applaud the efforts of Senators Toomey, Lee and Paul for advancing alternative budget proposals. Senate Republicans continue to advance and affirm bold solutions to the nation’s most urgent fiscal and economic challenges. Once again, Republicans are leading while the Democrats who run their party refuse to put forward solutions. Instead, they insist on recklessly spending billions of dollars we don’t have with no restraints and no accountability. The President and his party’s leaders refuse to tackle our generation’s defining challenge, choosing instead to repeat the mistakes of Europe with empty rhetoric, broken promises, and the growth-stifling folly of chasing ever-higher government spending with ever-higher tax increases. To find out where this path leads, just ask the Greeks.
“The Democrats who run their party are letting the country down. This is especially disappointing because there are some Democrats and Independent voices who have expressed a willingness to tackle our nation’s challenges in a bipartisan way with principled solutions. But Washington needs new leadership in the White House and the U.S. Senate in order to deliver these solutions to the American families who deserve them, and to ensure that we leave our children with a stronger nation than the one our parents left us.” To learn more about The Path to Prosperity – the House-passed FY2013 budget – please visit: http://budget.house.gov/ Of note: The Path to Prosperity received 41 more votes than the President’s budget in the U.S. Senate today and 228 more votes than the President’s budget in the U.S House of Representatives earlier this year. |
|
Unanimous Rejection in the Senate
From the Senate Budget Press Office:
0-99: Senate Unanimously Rejects President’s Budget
“If Congress adopts this budget, then along with the cuts that we’ve already made, we’ll be able to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion by the year 2022 — $4 trillion… But the main idea in the budget is this: At a time when our economy is growing and creating jobs at a faster clip, we’ve got to do everything in our power to keep this recovery on track.” – President Barack Obama, Feb. 13, 2012
“This Budget lays out the President’s vision to… build an economy that will grow robustly and create good jobs for years to come [and] pursue deficit reduction that is balanced and will put the country on a sustainable fiscal path.” – OMB Acting Director Jeffrey Zients, Feb. 14, 2012
“The president tomorrow will be presenting a budget that does $4 trillion of deficit reduction over 10 years. It does it in a way that builds an economy in America that can last… and calling for shared American values where everybody, you know, has a fair shot, does their fair share and plays by the same rules.” – White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew, Feb. 12, 2012
Obama’s New Stimulus Plan is a To-Do List of Old Ideas
This one is really really going to work this time. I promise!
Last Saturday, Obama unveiled his new stimulus plan — a list of more things for the government to do in order to create new jobs. That means more government spending.
The president’s list includes an expanded program to help homeowners refinance their mortgages, a proposal to give small businesses tax breaks for hiring more workers, a program that would help veterans find jobs, and an extension of tax credits for clean-energy companies.
The Washington Times reports that the cost for this new stimulus plan could be nearly $35 billion. Additionally, much of the parts of this “plan” are recycled ideas from the proposed Jobs Package that hasn’t gained much traction in Congress.
Obama’s new stimulus plan of old ideas seems more like election rhetoric aimed to appeal to voting blocs — veterans, struggling homeowners, green energy, and small businesses. Let’s hope they see through his tired, unpopular ideas.
8.1…because 341K Left the Work Force
Friday we hear the news that the new unemployment rate is 8.1%. Since Obama’s goal post is to get the number at least under 8% in time for election day, this number — on the surface — sounds relatively good, right?
The key thing to note (and the key thing to follow to see if it’s being mention by Obama) is that the reason for the lower unemployment rate is due to the fact that 342,000 left the labor force.
Payrolls only added 115,000 new jobs, the lowest number in six months. According to Bloomberg, it missed the target estimate of 160,000.
The unemployment rate was forecast to hold at 8.2 percent, according to the survey median. It has exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, the longest such stretch since monthly records began in 1948.
The participation rate, which indicates the share of working-age people in the labor force, fell to 63.6 percent, the lowest since December 1981, from 63.8 percent.
Bloomberg also posted the underemployment rate, which consists both of part-time workers who want full time work and those who have stopped working. That number is 14.5%.
The other facet of this jobs report is the rise in disability claims.
Overall, not a good picture for jobs and economy right now. Breitbart gave a quick synopsis on numbers and their theory as to why the Obama administration continues to focus on less critical matters, such as dogs and contraception. They are trying to deflect emotions away from the depressing job data which undermines Obama’s continued assertion that we are in a recovery and things are better.
Keystone Pipeline, Part II
TransCanada has reapplied for their Keystone Pipeline permit, appealing to Mr. Obama’s own stated goals of boosting American energy supplies. The Washington Times reports,
The State Department last year tried to put off a decision about TransCanada’s first application until after the election, arguing it needed more time to study the issue. That move delighted the president’s environmental allies who fear a future catastrophe, but angered many of his labor union supporters, who say the pipeline will produce jobs.
Congress then passed a bill requiring the president to expedite his decision, and faced with the tighter deadline the State Department ruled against the application.
Now, Republicans said Mr. Obama has a do-over.
Indeed. As I’ve stated in prior posts, passage of Keystone Pipeline project is important because the very fact of a project of this magnitude moving ahead has an immediate effect on the markets by changing the traders’ expectations of future supply.
Fox Business has noted that
For the Obama administration, the development has been politically troublesome, pitting environmentalists opposed to increased fossil fuel use and pipelines through sensitive areas against unions and other Democrats who say it will create badly needed jobs in a shaky economy.
With this question coming up within 6 months of an presidential election, it will be interesting to see if Obama continues to pander to his environment base, or appeal to voters who wish to see job creation and economic recovery.
Occupy…the Right Wing Extremists
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) claims to only deal with “hatred of people based on class characteristics,”. So when Charles Cooke of National Review Online decided to inquire if the SPLC would be the watchdog it claims to be and follow and investigate a group of Occupy-affiliated men who planned to blow up a bridge, he was told they would not.
When Mr. Cooke asked for further clarification, he was told the following: 1) “We’re not really set up to cover the extreme Left”, and 2) We only ever cover left-wing groups when they have a right-wing component . . .for example, “when anarchist groups are infiltrated by those on the right; Neo-Nazis, that sort of thing.”
At least they were open about their flagrant bias.
This Would Be Funny If It Wasn’t So Awful
For the record: Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary, 4/26/12.
I NEVER LIE.
WH Agency: Target the Oil & Gas Companies
First we had Energy Secretary Chu admit that high gas prices are a good thing. Now, we have the EPA — a darling agency of the Obama Administration — describe on video that the
EPA’s “general philosophy” is to “crucify” and “make examples” of oil and gas companies.
The video is below.
Senator Inhofe went on to remark that
the video provides Americans with “a glimpse of the Obama administration’s true agenda.”
That agenda, Inhofe said, is to “incite fear” in the public with unsubstantiated claims and “intimidate” oil and gas companies with threats of unjustified fines and penalties – then, quietly backtrack once the public’s perception has been firmly jaded against oil and natural gas.
Are we even surprised at this statement from the EPA? This attitude is all linked up with Obama’s current strategy of subsidizing “green energy” through the tax code. Of course, let’s not forget that Obama voted (yes, not present!) in 2005 against ending oil subsidies. Now the oil companies should be “crucified”.