October 2009 monthly budget deficit at a record $176 billion.

[roamer65]

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed2/idUSTRE5AB4O020091112?feedType=RSS&feedName=vcCandidateFeed2&virtualBrandChannel=10102

Staggering numbers, IMHO.

If these numbers continue, fiscal 2010 should top $2T.

[ddeclue]

1. Huh? That's not even a record number - sure you didn't lose a zero somewhere?

[roamer65]

2. It is a record monthly budget deficit according to Reuters.

Changed title to reflect it ;)

[ddeclue]

3. OK that makes a lot more sense.. I thought you meant annual not monthly.

[Igel]

4. Let's toast the new (fiscal) year.

I personally liked the NYT article today that talked about Obama's possibly reducing the deficit by returning TARP money instead of spending it--which would also allow for a kind of slush fund for additional expenditures and programs. ("See--I've returned $200 billion and increased spending by $100 billion over here, what a good budgeter I am.") It struck me as a bit disingenuous to include it in the previous year's debt because it was to be repaid--but we don't have "loan", just expense and income.

Further weirdness is treating the TARP money that's reimbursed as income instead of a reimbursement. When I kept books--a strictly low-budget operation with primitive software--I'd often put reimbursements in as negative income so they would reflect properly in the budget allocations.

And then there's treating the $220 billion or so that's sitting in the TARP account as though it had been disbursed and spent instead of still held by the government. I suppose that's government accounting weirdness.