• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Obama's $3.8 Trillion budget !- heading to Congress

GoFlyKiteNow

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
2,605
Points
0
Obama's $3.8 trillion budget heading to Congress
By ANDREW TAYLOR AND MARTIN CRUTSINGER
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITERS

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama's proposed budget predicts the national deficit will crest at a record-breaking $1.6 trillion in the current fiscal year, then start to recede in 2011 to $1.3 trillion, a congressional official said Sunday.

Still, the administration's new budget to be released Monday says deficits over the next decade will average 4.5 percent of the size of the economy, a level which economists say is dangerously high if not addressed, said the congressional official. The official was not authorized to discuss the budget before its public release.

Details of the administration's budget headed for Congress include an additional $100 billion to attack painfully high unemployment. The proposed $3.8 trillion budget would provide billions more to pull the country out of the Great Recession while increasing taxes on the wealthy and imposing a spending freeze on many government programs.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the administration believed "somewhere in the $100 billion range" would be the appropriate amount for a new jobs measure made up of a business tax credit to encourage hiring, increased infrastructure spending and money from the government's bailout fund to get banks to increase loans to struggling small businesses.

That price tag would be below a $174 billion bill passed by the House in December but higher than an $83 billion proposal that surfaced last week in the Senate.

Gibbs said it was important for Democrats and Republicans to put aside their differences to pass a bill that addresses jobs, the country's No. 1 concern. "I think that would be a powerful signal to send to the American people," Gibbs said in an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union."

Job creation was a key theme of the budget President Barack Obama was sending Congress on Monday, a document designed, as was the president's State of the Union address, to reframe his young presidency after a protracted battle over health care damaged his standing in public opinion polls and contributed to a series of Democratic election defeats.

Obama's $3.8 trillion spending plan for the 2011 budget year that begins Oct. 1 attempts to navigate between the opposing goals of pulling the country out of a deep recession and dealing with a budget deficit that soared to an all-time high of $1.42 trillion last year.

The Congressional Budget Office is forecasting that the deficit for the current budget year will be only slightly lower, $1.35 trillion, and the flood of red ink will remain massive for years to come, raising worries among voters and the foreign investors who buy much of the country's debt.

On the anti-recession front, congressional sources said Obama's new budget will propose extending the popular Making Work Pay middle-class tax breaks of $400 per individual and $800 per couple through 2011. They were due to expire after this year.

The budget will also propose $250 payments to Social Security recipients to bolster their finances in a year when they are not receiving the normal cost-of-living boost to their benefit checks because of low inflation. Obama will also seek a $25 billion increase in payments to help recession-battered states.

Obama's new budget will set off months of debate in the Democratically controlled Congress, especially in an election year in which Republicans are hoping to use attacks against government overspending to gain seats. Obama has argued that he inherited a deficit of more than $1 trillion and was forced to increase spending to stabilize the financial system and combat the worst recession since the 1930s.

http://www.seattlepi.com/national/1151ap_us_budget.html?source=rss
 
More meaningful measure would be debt to GDP. $3.8 trillion is a lot but its GDP is also huge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

At the top of list are countries like Zambabwae (241 %), Japan (170% of GDP), Italy (103%), Greece (93%).

Note the debt rating of Greece is on the line. India is at (58%), US is at (60%). China is (15%)
 
More meaningful measure would be debt to GDP. $3.8 trillion is a lot but its GDP is also huge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_debt

At the top of list are countries like Zambabwae (241 %), Japan (170% of GDP), Italy (103%), Greece (93%).

Note the debt rating of Greece is on the line. India is at (58%), US is at (60%). China is (15%)

LongBow, thanks much for your many posts on solid rationalising of figures.

However this one, I don't get it.

How can Japan be place number 2 behind Zimbabwae and Singapore are at 113% at number 5?

Are we overspent to built this glittering City, or do we have to take other numbers into consideration?
 
US is bankrupt. No Ah Loong will dare to lend them a single cent.

Obama can be a worst 败家子 than Bush.:(
 
Japan spend lots of money trying to stimulate its economy. However, due to corp culture, Japanese companies do not go bankrupt and are bought over by other Jap companies thereby weakening the company that does the buying.

Also, because Japan was already fully developed much of the public works stimulus went to wasteful projects - read about them paving over sides of rivers and canals!

A huge chunk of Chinese stimulus was spent on public works projects. Chinese are putting in infra for the next 50 years. That is why we see high speed bullet trains. After all the big cost is laying the tracks - so might as well spec the tracks for the next 50 years vs putting in a normal railroad and doing it again in 30 years. Remember, China is a large as US with 5 times the population. Having everyone fly, like how they do over in the US would be very pollutive and expensive and not productive. For example they are putting in high speed train from Beijing to Shanghai - 1300km but they trains can run 350km/h so they can cover that distance in 4 hours. It is like leaving Singapore at 8am and be in Bangkok for lunch meeting then be back in Singapore for dinner.

There is talk that Japan can not longer afford to buy US Treasuries (they were the largest holders of US Treasuries after China because of its high debt posiiton. The one good thing going for Japan is the huge domestic savings. Jap citizens save a lot and are willing to finance their Gov's debt by purchasing their G's debt.

Singapore debt ratio is indeed puzzling. Perhaps it is due to Gov borrowing from its citizens (CPF $$$). But unlike other countries (most Gov borrow money to provide provide for its own economy, we are, however, borrowing the citizens emajority savings $ to invest overseas. So although we may see a lot of Singapore G debt (G owes us the CPF $$), we are not seeing the huge amount of assets that G is holding (where the CPF $ went).

But using this metrics gives a somewhat better picture than just throwing a $3.8 Trillion figure.

LongBow, thanks much for your many posts on solid rationalising of figures.

However this one, I don't get it.

How can Japan be place number 2 behind Zimbabwae and Singapore are at 113% at number 5?

Are we overspent to built this glittering City, or do we have to take other numbers into consideration?
 
Allow me another question. Why does our government need to borrow into CPF to invest overseas? Is it to pay for the higher interest, and why not invest locally?

And about our record surplus year after year, are they only invested in safer government bonds, and isn't this huge enough then to touch our CPF money?

Thanks in advance.:)
 
I do not know enough. Anyone that know why we have such a high debt ratio please enlighten.


But firstly, our GDP is not an accurate measure of the size of our actual economy. Reason is because as shipping port we have lots of import and exports. Also MNCs are here because of our low tax and a lot of their mfg are merely transfer price tax avoidance purposes. These MNCs basically shift their profits to Singapore so tax low low. Same to for petrol refining.

As for CPF, initially the plan was to use the CPF money to develop SIngapore. Remember Singapore at the beginning was very poor. So by pooling this CPF $ we can fund HDB purchases, do nation building, and at the same time offer CPF holders a small return. But as the CPF pool increased, I guess Gov figured they could invest it and get a better return for themselves. This is a longgggg term loan that citizens are giving the G at 2% interest rate. If they could return 6% that would be 4% gain.


Allow me another question. Why does our government need to borrow into CPF to invest overseas? Is it to pay for the higher interest, and why not invest locally?

And about our record surplus year after year, are they only invested in safer government bonds, and isn't this huge enough then to touch our CPF money?

Thanks in advance.:)
 
When you look at Bush and Obama, and think about what LKY says, perhaps you can figure out what LKY means by a freak election. In the US, they've elected freaks and idiots in consecutive elections. One anyhow invade; one anyhow spend. One anyhow talk until he himself don't know what he means (but he doesn't mind or care what he means anyway); one wax lyrical and rhetoric until he himself have to check dictionary for the meaning of his utterance (only to be referred to a thesarus for better understanding). Yet both could win. That's democracy at it's best. A citizen is free to vote for freaks and idiots, especially when the voter oneself is also one of the same specie.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top