Originally Posted by SDW2001
This is where the hole in your argument is. You are assuming revenues would have otherwise continued on track. But they would not have, because as BRussell himself said, revenue growth depends in large part on the growth of the economy. The economy was stalled.
Wrong, dead wrong, and I have the facts to prove thay you are dead wrong on this one.
Download the OMB FY 2009 historical data (in PDF format) that I posted a link to in your infamous "scorched earth" thread (BTW, do all of your threads/posts have to be ~100% hyperbole? Just curious.).
BTW, I've imported Table 1.1 into an Excel spreadsheet, so I'm way ahead of you on this one.
An actual downturn in federal revenues has only occurred seven times in the past 50 years (1959 thru 2008 (this last year is an OMB projected estimate), those seven years were (or could be);
That's at least three years of revenue losses that will go down in history as having fallen under one administration, your pal, Chimpy MacFlightsuit. In the worst case, 2008 and 2009, could also be added to GWB's list for a total of five revenue loss years.
Oh, and get this OMB is projecting federal outlays for FY 2010 ($3,091 Trillion), less than what Chimpy MacFlightsuit is asking for in FY 2009 ($3,107 Trillion). A downturn in federal expenditures has actually occured only once in the past 50 years, in 1965. Talk about a "cut and run" fiscal policy, GWB will be running out of the WH leaving a building full of broken toys for the next administration to clean up, to fix, and/or replace.
Now, let's see you talk
your way out of this one.
Oh, and if the economy has truly stalled, your pal Chimpy MacFlightsuit and those neocon artists deserve the full blame, as it happened on their watch, with their abhorrent fiscal policies, and lack of fiscal responsibility
Why do I get the feeling that GWB is digging an ever deeper hole for himself and his ilk?.