US Budget Deficit Down to $680B, Lowest in 5 Years

[hue]

Source: abc NEWS

For the first time in five years, the U.S. government has run a budget deficit below $1 trillion.

The government says the deficit for the 2013 budget year totaled $680.3 billion, down from $1.09 trillion in 2012. That's the smallest imbalance since 2008, when the government ran a $458.6 billion deficit.

The deficit is the gap between the government's tax revenue and its spending. It narrowed for the budget year that ended on Sept. 30 because revenue rose while spending fell.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/us-budget-deficit-680b-lowest-years-20732055

---

Let's see this as front & center main stream media news!!

[Bandit]

1. Remember when Bush* had record Deficits year after year and they were under $400 billion

A Deficit is just that, A DEFICIT and we should manage our country a little better than we currently are. Clinton's last two years as President we had surpluses and were actually paying down our DEBT.....But nooo we had to keep the Bush* tax cuts in place for ninety percent of the people and maintain a military Budget bigger than Bush*/Cheney ever had..

[mdbl]

20. I agree.

We need to go back to the tax codes from the pre-reagan era. The deficit would shrink immediately.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

23. Yep

+1

[Purveyor]

2. kick. Thanks for posting. eom +1

[DCBob]

3. This means the Repukes will have to work harder to damage the economy to keep the deficit up.

so they use that in campaigning next year.

[jtuck004]

4. Correlates well with the creation of crappy jobs, and inversely with

how well the banks are doing. What a great future we have in store...

[kardonb]

6. future

we DO have a GREAT FUTURE ahead of us , despite all you nay-sayers and doomsday prognosticators ! So there !

[progressoid]

10. You forgot this...

[Yavin4]

5. This is bad news. Really bad news.

In sluggish economic times, government deficits should be higher, much higher. The country is starved for jobs, and only the govt can provide them.

[cstanleytech]

8. Not true, big business can provide them as well they just are choosing not to

and are instead choosing to hire more and more part timers and directing those same part timers to apply for food stamps and other assistance programs in order to avoid paying people a living wage so as to keep their corporate profits up.

[progressoid]

9. And they will continue to do that unless our gov't does something about it.

And it looks like that won't happen. Instead, our government is cutting programs rather than expanding them.

[cstanleytech]

14. The answer isnt to expand programs or atleast not all of them.

Heathcare yes, that should be expanded as well as assistance to the poor, elderly and disabled but whats really needed is for a carrot and stick approach that hits them where it hurts if they insist on being cheap bastards on what they pay the majority of their workers and the place to hit them is in their profits with a higher progressive tax depending on the number of part timers combined with the total number of their employees who have to apply for assistance from the government.
The bigger the number is who need help the bigger tax the company pays on its profits.

[True Blue Door]

7. Raise rich people's taxes enough and we won't have a deficit at all.

Whenever any greedy, money-grubbing conservative starts bitching about deficits, just say "I agree, so let's get started raising your taxes to take care of it."

[ourfuneral]

11. FOXspin

President's Numbers Continue To Go Down!

[hughee99]

16. Or "The Sequester works"... n/t

[freshwest]

12. GOP sputters: But, but, there aren't enough deaths yet! We'll try harder, Satan!

http://www.evilgopbastards.com/

Republicans serve The Beast.

From the dawn of mankind they are the regressive element that's been holding back and destroying our civilization. They nourish other-dimensional entities that feed on misery, pain, and chaos.

Republicans are their minions, and hope to share in these entities' power, or be spared the pain.

But The Beast never shares.

The Beast never spares.

~NBachers

[ourfuneral]

13. Sick! Sick Sick!

Yep, you guessed it: I used to be an Iron Maiden fan.

[DeSwiss]

15. K&R

- Obama's tighter with the purse than Clinton was.....

[Munificence]

18. Do you really

understand how to read that graph?

It means that Obama has spent 1.4 times more than Bush and Bush spent 8.1 times more on 06-09 than he did before.

Comparing Clintons 3.2 to Obama's 1.4 is not even close as an "annualized" looks at the last year (or in this case a 4 year time frame)and then sees how much "more" is being spent than the previous "year" (or 4 years years in this case).

[DeSwiss]

19. Nope, it's the rate of growth in spending.

Just like it says.

[Wounded Bear]

24. Pretty sure those numbers are percentages, not multiples....

So Obama oversaw 1.4% increase in annualized spending, vs Bush who had 8.1%.

And that's after the 2009 stimulus was re-assigned to Obama.

[blkmusclmachine]

17. Deficits Don't Matter.

[Stallion]

21. Budgets as % of GDP now Lower than in 4 of Reagan's Last 6 Years

just another talking point when they claim run away deficits as compared to Saint Reagan

1983 5.88
1984 4.72
1985 5.03
1986 4.96

2013 4.20

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

22. But but but

That's all librul propaganda. Rush Limpblob told me so.