President Obama later today will propose a 10-year budget plan that would increase the national debt by $7.2 trillion over 10 years -- $1.1 trillion less than if it weren't implemented.
That, of course, assumes a government that is run on the current ruinous trajectory. Thus, it's a meaningless comparison. Tapper explains the true meaning of the budget:
The plan shows that Obama will not take the lead on any aggressive measure
to eliminate the nation’s $14 trillion debt. This sets up the Obama administration on a collision course with Republicans, who are calling for serious deficit reduction and spending cuts. On Friday night, House Republicans unveiled a spending bill to fund the government for the next seven months that they say will reduce the president’s requested spending levels this year by at least $100 billion.
How much difference would $100 billion make? Some, but not close to enough. Why? Back to Tapper:
The President will today propose a budget for 2012 in which the U.S. government would take in $2.627 trillion and spend $3.729 trillion. The 2012 budget deficit would be $1.101 trillion, less than this year’s projected $1.645 trillion deficit.
So if the Republicans got their way, the deficit would only be a smidge over a trillion dollars.
Here's the bottom line -- as Tapper notes, at no point in the next 10 years does Obama assume we'll spend less than we take in. Does anyone think that's sustainable?
The day of reckoning is coming, y'all. And our children better reckon that they have some very tough decisions to make, because my generation (Obama is two years older than me) has kicked the can down the road, too, just like our generational older brothers and sisters, and all who came before us.