Source: Washington Post
As you can see, the red ink (deficits) is flowing in Washington, DC.
In a way though, this record budget deficit is a little less bad than it could have been. As you can see from the next chart, also from the Washington Post, earlier this year the deficit was projected to be even larger, more in the range of $1.75 - 1.85 trillion.
Source: Washington Post
But, where do we go from here? As I read through this piece from the Washington Post, I was not reassured that anyone in Washington, DC actually has a handle on this. Or, at least, the WaPo reporters could not find anyone who really has a plan [emphasis added]:
Record-High Deficit May Dash Big Plans (Washington Post, October 17, 2009, Lori Montgomery and Neil Irwin)
The federal budget deficit soared to a record $1.4 trillion in the fiscal year that ended in September, a chasm of red ink unequaled in the postwar era that threatens to complicate the most ambitious goals of the Obama administration…
…At about 10 percent of the overall economy, the gap between federal spending and tax collections is the largest on record since the end of World War II, and bigger in nominal terms than the past four years of deficits combined. Next year is unlikely to be much better, budget analysts say. And Obama’s current policies would drive the budget gap into the trillion-dollar range for much of the next decade.
This is the type of record we really don’t want. And, I think we need to get past the partisan sniping. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats can claim any glory when it comes to spending control. Politicians seldom get criticized for spending our money, so they keep right on doing it. We can assign blame to different players and parties, but that still begs the question: ‘What the heck do we do?’
The WaPo article continues:
…A combination of factors combined to produce the $1.4 trillion gap. A deep recession caused tax revenue to plummet by more than $400 billion this year, while the government’s economic rescue efforts swelled federal spending. In all, the government spent $3.5 trillion in fiscal 2009, while taking in only $2.1 trillion in taxes, the Treasury Department said. Among the outlays: $113 billion in stimulus cash, $154 billion for the bank bailout and nearly $96 billion in capital payments to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the troubled mortgage insurance giants that the government took over last year.
…”In the short term the deficit is not our primary problem,” said Heather Boushey, a senior economist at the left-leaning Center for American Progress. “The unemployment rate is near 10 percent, and the key thing is to get the economy growing, which will increase tax revenues. But in the long term we do need to think about the deficit problem and do something about it.”
Economists universally agree that the nation cannot run such massive deficits indefinitely. The question now facing Obama, budget experts said, is how to bring spending and revenue more closely into balance in the years ahead, after the economy fully recovers…
We cannot run such massive deficits indefinitely on that much there is agreement. But, where is the plan for how we bring spending and revenues more closely into balance? If there is one, I have not seen it.