The federal deficit for 2009 is about $1.42 trillion, amounting to about 10% of the United States economy or a little under $5,000 for each person in the United States. Wow.
The federal deficit for 2009 is about $1.42 trillion, amounting to about 10% of the United States economy or a little under $5,000 for each person in the United States. Wow.
Prof. S. says:
Not a big deal. I hear they have a printing press in Washington that makes money, so you know, they’ll just print some more.
October 18, 2009, 7:57 pmGaius Obvious says:
And do the math for the federal debt and you will see why Obama wants to devalue the dollar and hyperinflate the economy. There’s no way we could ever pay a substantial part of that back as it stands.
October 18, 2009, 7:59 pmCheckEnclosed says:
How much of that federal debt is owned by American citizens, companies, pension funds, etc.?
Likewise, how much foreign 2009 debt is owned by U.S. entities of all kinds?
U.S. government debt held by U.S. entities largely represents transfers between bondholders & taxpayers.
October 18, 2009, 7:59 pmMark N. says:
Appears to set a new post-war record, surpassing the longstanding record-holder, the Reagan budget of ’83, which had clocked in at 6%.
October 18, 2009, 8:00 pmtroll_dc2 says:
Doesn’t it make you pine for the good old days of Bill Clinton?
October 18, 2009, 8:00 pmArrowSmith says:
Sounds like a circular firing squad to me.
October 18, 2009, 8:01 pmtroll_dc2 says:
If the proposed balanced budget constitutional amendment had been adopted, would it have been able to stop the financial bleeding? Or would ways have been found around it?
October 18, 2009, 8:03 pmJeff S. says:
Gee, just think if they gave us the money to spend instead of those poor suckers at Goldman Sachs…Since, politicians need to prop up billionaires on wall street, a torch, tar and feathers seem to be in order. Along with pitchforks, of course.
October 18, 2009, 8:10 pmJ. Aldridge says:
Never allow politicians to manage your finances under any rule they please.
October 18, 2009, 8:14 pmJeff S. says:
BTW, 98% of all banks will be exempt from new regulation. That’s 8000 banks or more, exempted from oversight.
October 18, 2009, 8:14 pmhttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/16/business/16regulate.html
Now, that is change I can hope for /sarc
Ariel says:
Or even for those of George W. Bush! Not my favorite on this topic, but starting to look uptight, by comparison.
October 18, 2009, 8:44 pmOwen H. says:
Yeah, it sucks that it is costing this much to get of the crap the last 8 years left us in. A trillion in debt for a war based on lies, that’s ok, but spend the money at home and you idiots go ballistic.
October 18, 2009, 8:49 pmConstantin says:
Yikes.
October 18, 2009, 8:54 pmAllan Walstad says:
In gridlock with the Repubs in Congress–you bet. The less those pols can “accomplish,” the safer our rights and wallets are.
October 18, 2009, 8:55 pmLeo Marvin says:
Dick Cheney must be right about something. With any luck, this is it.
October 18, 2009, 8:57 pmgeokstr says:
FIFY, and yes, it does.
October 18, 2009, 8:58 pmAllan Walstad says:
In case you hadn’t noticed, Obama is pursuing the same wars-based-on-lies.
October 18, 2009, 8:58 pmDuffy Pratt says:
There’s less than $900 billion dollars in circulation. That means the deficit is approximately 160% of the total amount of money currently in print. That’s just the deficit.
October 18, 2009, 8:58 pmoledrunk says:
It is very nearly that of the Eisenhower administration if view as a percentage of GDP.
October 18, 2009, 8:58 pmWe paid WWII debt down with higher marginal taxes.
ArthurKirkland says:
Do you customarily blame the fire department for water damage it caused while extinguishing a fire?
October 18, 2009, 9:10 pmAnonymoose says:
No comment on how this is actually 200-400 billion dollars smaller than expected? It’s a big number, but we were already estimating a 1.3t deficit back before January for FY09. That it’s only 100b more after ARRA passed is surprising and means tax receipts aren’t as boned as we expected.
October 18, 2009, 9:18 pmTweets that mention The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Federal Deficit in 2009 Amounts to 10% of the Entire U.S. Economy -- Topsy.com says:
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jason D. McClain, sue groves. sue groves said: The Volokh Conspiracy » Blog Archive » Federal Deficit in 2009 … http://bit.ly/4keWE9 [...]
October 18, 2009, 9:42 pmMichael Haas says:
I think the debate could benefit from a current German perspective as seen in the views of a German minister of the ECB, Jurgen Stark. I’m reminded of the view of Ordnungspolitik as described in the article, roughly a free market with limits. No higher than a 3% GDP deficit is to to be allowed under EC rules. While one can argue with a one time event in the present crisis, it seems to be playing a dangerous game of deficit chicken to have a proposed health care plan which relies on reducing payments by rule to doctors while at the time you are scoring by that rule you are exempting the mandated reductions for this year. To use an analogy, the present government and its defenders seem to be saying, ‘We can have 3 beers.’ Well that may be so except it depends maybe on how many beers you’ve already had.
October 18, 2009, 9:54 pmRick Rockwell says:
“We had to destroy the economy in order to save it.”
October 18, 2009, 10:00 pmbillkk says:
“In case you hadn’t noticed, Obama is pursuing the same wars-based-on-lies.”
I must have missed the part where Obama argued that we need to invade Iraq because of it’s ties to Al Qaida, because of its massive stockpile of chemical weapons and because it was on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons.
Got a cite for that, sport?
October 18, 2009, 10:04 pmvic says:
and remember all the DEMs who were busy trying to outdo each other in their support for this– Obama was not part of this but Hillary was
and stop blaming the idiot bush for everything
if the exalted O is so great let him fix this deficiet
BTW if we add up the unfunded social security and medicare liabilities the deficiet is apparantly closer to 66 trillion or ssomething rather stageringly big.
October 18, 2009, 10:39 pmAllan Walstad says:
Oh come on, Arthur. Obama sent more troops to Afghanistan and is considering sending still more. As candidate, when did he say we’d be out of Iraq?
There was never any legitimate mission in Iraq, and whatever mission there might have been in Afghanistan was not to turn it into another Vietnam. Obama is not putting out any fire. He’s weasel-wording and counting votes like any other pol.
October 18, 2009, 11:29 pmAllan Walstad says:
Excuse me, I missed the part where I supposedly said he made those arguments. And apparently you’ve missed the part where Obama hasn’t withdrawn the US troops that Bush had no business sending there in the first place.
October 18, 2009, 11:35 pmbgates says:
We paid WWII debt down with higher marginal taxes, and the only functioning industrial economy on the face of the earth, at a time when the government thought building and selling goods and services was a positive boon rather than something that makes baby Gaia cry.
I must have missed the part where Obama argued that we need to invade Iraq because of it’s ties to Al Qaida, because of its massive stockpile of chemical weapons and because it was on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons.
Ludicrous. Obama would never hinder a despot’s pursuit of nuclear weapons.
October 18, 2009, 11:52 pmBruce Hayden says:
I love how so many people believe that if they just say something enough times, that it will be true. Somehow it all becomes lies when it comes out of the Bush Administration, but when the Senate and House Intelligence committees see the same intelligence, and come to the same conclusions, as do the British, French, and, yes, even the Russians.
October 19, 2009, 1:05 amArrowSmith says:
He’s not trying to extinguish the fire, he’s pour kerosene on it. Idiot.
October 19, 2009, 2:06 amuberVU - social comments says:
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by jasonmcclain: Federal deficit for 2009 amounts to 10% of the entire US economy ::: http://bit.ly/2pImWV...
October 19, 2009, 3:49 amRicardo says:
The bipartisan Congressional Budget Office did the math back in January of this year. They projected net interest on the national debt will increase to $461 billion by 2019. That’s about 10% of projected tax revenue in that year. Far from ideal but rumors of impending default have been greatly exaggerated.
October 19, 2009, 3:51 amjrose says:
Or even for those of George W. Bush! Not my favorite on this topic, but starting to look uptight, by comparison
Except for the stimulus package, which the CBO estimated contributed $200 billion, fiscal 2009 is Bush’s.
October 19, 2009, 7:33 amcubanbob says:
That is because those guys on Wall Street are democrats, that is why Goldman Sachs ( Rubin and Corzine) got bailed out.
October 19, 2009, 11:22 amcubanbob says:
I must have missed the part where we are paying down the the debt.
October 19, 2009, 11:27 amChris Bell says:
jrose and Anonymoose have it right, a lot of this current deficit belongs to Bush – except for the stimulus, which is a one-time add on that will increase the deficit this year and next. Obama’s first budget was passed at the beginning of May, set to take effect starting October 1st. The budget year that just ended was enacted by President Bush.
Also, this is MUCH lower than the $1.6 trillion that was estimated at the time of the stimulus! (I know, I know, with good news like that, who needs bad news? But still….)
October 19, 2009, 12:33 pmeyesay says:
Among the most painless taxes is the estate tax, because it’s paid by people who are already dead. If you’re really concerned about the deficit, you should be calling for an estate tax with an exemption somewhere between $1 million and $3.5 million. If you don’t support such an estate tax, then you’re not serious about the deficit.
Why is everybody throwing shoes at me?
October 19, 2009, 12:41 pmJoe says:
FY 2009 total interest paid on the public debt was $383 billion. FY 2008 was $451 billion. Reduction in 2009 was due to historically low interest rates, which at this point, have nowhere to go but up.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
October 19, 2009, 4:12 pmmariner says:
Rick:
Fixed.
October 19, 2009, 5:47 pmRicardo says:
What you are quoting is the total interest paid on all government debt outstanding — including interest paid to the Social Security Trust Fund and other intra-governmental transfers. The number I quoted is net interest paid to outstanding debt held by the public.
October 19, 2009, 10:05 pmRicardo says:
You forgot to mention that famous Democrat Henry Paulson.
October 19, 2009, 10:06 pm