I was trying to use simple numbers so that the moron could follow.
The CBO projects that if nothing changes we would add an additional $7 Trillion to the debt in the next ten years. Which means if nothing changes, then according to the Obama 'plan' it would add $5.9 Trillion to the debt. An average of $590B per year for the next decade. That is approximately $120B over the 'atrocious/disastrous/insert Dem horrific adjective here' that Bush put up in 2008 (though the Dems are quick to forget who ran Congress during that time)
Have you ever noticed, when pinheads are referencing the CBO to bolster one of their idiotic arguments, it's always referred to as "the non-partisan" CBO? As if to say, these numbers are all valid and legitimate, because the source is not biased. As if this must be the truth and factual, because it's non-partisan. They seem to miss the fact that, while the CBO is indeed non-partisan, it is also non-objective and non-withstanding. The CBO makes static calculations based on the current trend, and assuming the current trend will continue over the next 10 years. This method almost never produces an accurate result, because too many of the factors involved, are out of the purview of the CBO to consider, they are non-partisan, non-objective, and non-withstanding.
This is where we get the infamous "Clinton Surplus" we hear so much about. It wasn't a surplus that ever existed in reality, it was from a calculated projection by the CBO, based on trends and static rate of increase in the dotcoms over the next 10 years, which never panned out. Instead of following the trend projected (and considered by the CBO) the dotcoms went belly-up, and there was a 'bursting of the bubble'. The projected revenues conceived by the static calculations of the CBO, never materialized, and were never realized, therefore, there was never a surplus generated.... there might have been, if the CBO had been accurate, but the CBO is not there to be an accurate prognosticator of the future.
Here's another neat little thing about the
non-partisan CBO... They are bound by law to examine legislation in terms of raw statistics and trends, without any consideration for ramifications of the legislation itself, they simply can't judge or determine anything based on what they think might happen as a result of passage. Here's an example: Let's say Congress passes a law to tax everyone at 100%... we already know (see Laffer Curve) that a 100% tax rate would produce $0 revenue, because there is 0 incentive to produce income. The CBO would look at the statistics over the past 10 years, the average amount of income earned per individual, the amount of tax the average person paid... the average amount of income earned... and they would calculate 100% tax on that amount and extend those calculations out for 10 years, based on rates of growth in income for the past 10 years... The non-partisan, non-objective, non-withstanding CBO would report that this legislation generates $30 trillion over the next 10 years! W000t!! We can pay off the debt!! NOT!
