U.S. budget deficit down 37.6 percent through July

Government remains on track to post lowest annual budget gap in five years
Associated Press
Aug 12, 2013

The government on Monday reported a $97.6 billion deficit for July but remains on track to post its lowest annual budget gap in five years.

July's figure raises the deficit so far for the 2013 budget year to $607.4 billion, the government says. That's 37.6 percent below the $973.8 billion deficit for the first 10 months of the 2012 budget year.

The Congressional Budget Office has forecast that the annual deficit will be $670 billion when the budget year ends Sept. 30, far below last year's $1.09 trillion. It would mark the first year that the gap between spending and revenue has been below $1 trillion since 2008.

Steady economic growth, higher taxes, lower government spending and increased dividends from mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have helped shrink the deficit.

Still, looming budget fights in Congress are complicating the picture. When lawmakers return from their recess in September, they will need to increase the government's borrowing limit. They will also have to approve a spending plan for the budget year that begins Oct. 1. Republicans and Democrats remain far apart on both measures.

Republicans want President Barack Obama to accept deeper cuts in domestic government programs and in expensive benefit programs such as Medicare and Social Security. Obama has argued that Republicans must be willing to accept higher taxes on the highest-earning Americans.

Conservative House Republicans have signaled a willingness to force a partial government shutdown as a way of defunding Obama's universal health care law, which they oppose.

A possible compromise would be to approve a stopgap budget to keep the government operating after Oct. 1 while both sides seek a permanent solution.

Obama has vowed not to negotiate with Congress over raising the borrowing limit as he did in 2011. But some Republicans want to test the president's resolve even if it rattles financial markets. Investors fear a doomsday scenario in which the country would default on its debt, which it has never done.

Through July, the government collected $2.29 trillion in revenue, up 13.9 percent from the same 10 months last year. Government spending during this period totaled $2.89 trillion, down 2.9 percent from a year ago. That decline reflects, in part, automatic government spending cuts that began taking effect March 1.

Collectively, the government's deficits increase the national debt, now at $16.7 trillion.




Yeah ! Start listening to Fox News , Rush Limbaugh , Hannity ,etc.


Obamacare will crush this country. Heck even the big labor unions who support the Dems are against it.

I guess you guys missed that article about companies nationwide cutting hours to avoid the stiff penalties Obamacare brings with it.

You know you have been duped when Congress has exempted themselves from it.


Meh...I doubt it. Nationalized Health Care hasn't crushed Canada or any of the other First World countries that have it. Heck, even Costa Rica (where Limbaugh said he would go, if Obamacare passed) has nationalized health care. This is the same exact thing conservatives said when Social Security was enacted.

Obamacare does the right thing: it provides a health safety net for all Americans. The penalties are in place because companies can't be trusted to do the right thing by their workers.

If they are cutting hours, in spite of record profits, that just proves my point: they don't care about their workers, and only care about finding a way around the law to fatten the wallets of the 1%. Your ire should be aimed at the greedy, unethical few at the top.

You can join the hand-wringers, or you can accept the fact that it's a law that even a conservative Supreme Court supports.


Nationalized Healthcare in Canada doesn't penalize those not abiding by its conditions. Costa Rica? Horrible comparison because of the size and demographics.

Most large companies I know provide insurance to all their employees. So how are they doing wrong to their employees currently? Facts are they are not.

The penalties are in place to force companies to change the way they provide insurance which has already PROVEN to raise costs to the employer. Now, Im sure you have no problem with that but I know for a fact its crippling many companies.

FedEx....one of my employees husband works for them. They just received a letter the other day telling them that their premiums are going up in 2014, their deductible is going up in 2014 and that Obamacare and its regulations are costing FedEx tens of millions across the board.

Have a guy I know well. A higher up in a rubber company. The costs associated with Obamacare has forced them to do away with insurance for their 50 employees and just take the penalty hit year after year.

These are real life local companies, not some fairytale.

You can ignore the facts all you want. Personally, I don't care coaster because your opinion is not factual. You spew out the same exact stuff you hate on. Its called being hypocritical.


Not ignoring facts. Fact is, companies will never do right by their employees. Any new costs won't be absorbed by those who can and should absorb them: those at the top. They don't like being told they can only own 14 yachts instead of 15, and instead force their blue-collar staff to further tighten their belts.

The unspoken part of your argument is that without Obamacare, we all ended up paying higher insurance premiums and health care costs to cover the millions of people without health care. You didn't actually think that hospitals provide free service to 30 million people, did you? The reality is that the uninsured turn to ($$$) ER visits for everything, instead of a far less expensive visit to a family doctor, simply because they don't have any health insurance.

All reform is uncomfortable - both for those at the top as well as you and I - but that doesn't mean it's not the right thing to do. We are the only First World country that didn't offer nationalized health care, and something we need to do to continue to keep calling ourselves the best..


Another portion of this well thoght out and dman near perfect bill that wasn't allowed to be amended, not given time to even be read before voted on bill.


"First, there was the delay of Obamacare’s Medicare cuts until after the election. Then there was the delay of the law’s employer mandate. Then there was the announcement, buried in the Federal Register, that the administration would delay enforcement of a number of key eligibility requirements for the law’s health insurance subsidies, relying on the “honor system” instead. Now comes word that another costly provision of the health law—its caps on out-of-pocket insurance costs—will be delayed for one more year."

According to the Congressional Research Service, as of November 2011, the Obama administration had missed as many as one-third of the deadlines, specified by law, under the Affordable Care Act. Here are the details on the latest one.

Don't forget that the president has let congress opt out of what the peons have for medical insurance. The elite gets their platinum care, the people get the shaft.

1/3 of the deadlines haven't been met... so far. Wonder what the over/under betting line is on the rest? As they start to come faster will more be met... or more delayed in this well written, well thought out piece of legislation? This is how the so-called "adults" run things. This is what the democrats are running on in 2014 and 2016. Don't forget to look at the polling on what the People think of Obamacare.


As if congressmen read ANY bill before it's voted upon. As far as the expected growing pains of any massive reform like this, should we be surprised that there have been delays, especially when one party is doing everything they can to delay its enactment?

Yes, voters, please do remember which party has tried to help the middle class and poor, by enacting health care for all (Dems). And remember which party has tried (40 times) to take away health care from 30 million Americans, and have continually sowed the seeds of misinformation, doubt and unsubstantiated statistics regarding Obamacare, human conception, Immigration and gay marriage (Reps).

Darwin's choice

Speaking of mis-information....



Re: "please do remember which party has tried to help the middle class and poor,"

Smoke and mirrors Comrade.

That "help" amounts to vote buying and making promises that will eventually become unfundable.


Yeah remember grumpy....we had to pass it first to know what was in it.

Its all a joke. This administration has a legit problem with reading and doing what is right.

Why would they pass such a great thing and then exempt themselves from it?

I guess the democratic supporters are ok with just passing whatever and not reading it first.

Hey coaster, Obama was against gay marriage, but he flip flopped to gain votes. How convenient. Also, and once again your opinion is just that and wrong....Obama and the Dems have delayed the penalties associated with Obamacare until when? Oh yeah, thats right....after the elections...how convenient again.

Im curious to see how many of those 30 million that are claimed to not have insurance actually get insurance when this catastrophe kicks in? Im willing to bet the numbers who change much.

Hey but who cares right. Even the number improves by 10 million, the flip side is the REST of this nation will feel the crunch from Obie care. The good ole dem way, provide for the few on the rest of everyones back.


Unlike the last President, who actually did have a problem with reading and doing what was right.

Not sure how Obama would gain votes by supporting gay marriage, since he was already in office and won't be running for office in the future. I'm glad he is doing the right thing and denouncing all forms of discrimination. You're welcome to continue voting for the anti-women, anti-gay Neanderthals who run for GOP office, if you wish.

By the way, you have it completely backwards:
It's the Republican way to provide for the few (the 1%) on the back of the rest of us (the 99%). Apparently, you don't even know what your own party actually stands for. You're actually in favor of Democratic ideals and don't even realize it. Hilarious :)


Bill said that if you want to live like a republican, vote for a Democrat. How true that is!


Re: "they don't care about their workers, and only care about finding a way around the law to fatten the wallets of the 1%."

Brainless blather.

Since it's obviously so damn easy:

When are you starting a business and paying your employees a "living wage," and top of the line health and welfare benefits.

Asked repeatedly and ALWAYS dodged by you:

Why does STRS invest with hedge funds, foreign cos. and private equity firms?

The facts: Your retirement plan helps support the one percent Comrade.



Not dodged. You just don't like my answers, so you say they aren't answers.

Every retirement plan is run by rich people. This is news? What would be your suggestion for an alternate option?

Instead of calling my comment about the greedy 1% mere "brainless blather", I'm wondering why you didn't provide any statistics/facts to prove me wrong. You don't because you know and I know there is absolutely NO evidence to prove that Trickle Down Economics works, and rather, lots of evidence proving that it doesn't work.

Actually, you don't even need to hunt up statistics. We all can see that the gap between the haves and have-nots continues to grow. Democrats try to fix that, so EVERYONE can succeed. Republicans deny that it's happening (pay no attention to that billionaire with his 15 homes and 22 yachts), and instead accuse Dems of "class warfare".

Not saying Obamacare is easy. I'm just saying it's the right thing to do, and maybe companies can make a little less profit in order to take care of their employees. After all, didn't a GOP senator say "Companies are people"? How about putting their money where their mouth is, for a change?


Re: "Every retirement plan is run by rich people."

THAT'S your pathetic answer?

You suggest that some should refuse SS and Medicare. Likewise, why don't you refuse STRS benefit payments or donate them to charity?


You misquoted me. AGAIN. What I said was that if you (personally, just you) think Socialism is so bad, then you, out of ideological purity, should stand behind your own words and not accept any SS or Medicare.

Besides, you don't want your friends to think you're one of Mitt's 47%, do you?


Re: "should stand behind your own words and not accept any SS or Medicare."

And likewise I've asked you:

You don't believe that assets which are taken from you should be returned?

Who gives a sh*t about Romney? I'm not envious of others wealth like you Comrade.

AGAIN: Since you hate rich people and corps, why not refuse your STRS benefits payments?


Re: "maybe companies can make a little less profit in order to take care of their employees."

Maybe? Put a number to that nonsense.

Maybe STRS should ask for less ROR on their investments with the one percenters instead of attempting to maximize it?


Futility coasterfan, futility! Try explaining it to him if you ever catch him sober!


Spoken like a true Fox watcher.


"Comparing Obama's Policies with French Socialist Hollande":


Can you say socialist?


Time to wake up and smell the coffee. A majority of voters under age 30 don't see Socialism as a bad thing. That's because things like Social Security and Medicare are also so-called "Socialism", yet have proved an invaluable safety net for decades.

Gotta love how conservatives try to paint Socialism as a dirty word, using it interchangeably with "Communism" and "Nazism". Betcha $10 that most of them couldn't tell what the difference is between the three...
In Contango's warped world, mainstream Republicans are RINOs and mainstream Democrats like me are Communists.

Unless Contango and his kind want to continually become more irrelevant, you've got to get out of the 1950's and stop alienating huge swaths of the electorate. You don't like us, and we don't much like you, but there are MORE of us. I'll bet that's some math you can understand...


Re: "A majority of voters under age 30 don't see Socialism as a bad thing."

You capitalize socialism? Impressive!

Got a link or is that more nonsense?

Not suprising that the youth would fall for socialist "heaven on earth" economic stupidity.

Comrade, you help prove that personal finance and economic illiteracy is rampant in the U.S. and you're merely spreading the disease.

Socialism: Ask a child if he/she wants free ice cream.

Capitalism: Ask a child to perform a chore and he/she will be rewarded with ice cream.

Which one will they usually choose?



Beats the heck out of swallowing thoroughly debunked GOP economic policies. Unfortunately, I don't have a link for the article I mentioned, but it was part of a long laundry list of things espoused by the GOP that a majority of young voters disagree with, as polled in a non-partisan survey.

Let's suffice to say that we all know that a huge majority of young voters went for Obama in 2012, and turned their nose up at both Mitt and everything Mitt stood for. If you need more substantiation than that, I'll try to hunt up the article. You, of course, would deny everything in it, so it kinda sounds like a waste of both our time...

If it weren't for gerrymandering, the GOP would be an endangered species on a statewide level. Their state candidates actually won fewer total votes across the nation in 2012, but they are able to pack the House, even though numbers-wise, they are in the minority.

Of course, you can't gerrymander an entire country, which is why they have lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 presidential elections.


Re: "Beats..."

Yet more turgid political nonsense without one single solitary shred of factual information.

Don't give a sh*t about Mitt - didn't vote for him.

Not to worry Comrade, go with the "popular" flow all the while I attempt to protect me and my own from the greed and eventual economic failure of you (bleeping) collectivists.


You forgot to mention the one we have in America:

Runaway Capitalism: Ask a child to perform a chore so that his master can be rewarded with ice cream.


Re: "his master can be rewarded with ice cream."

You mean like the STRS which makes a ROI and then pays you benefits?

More dodging?

Why not refuse your STRS benefit payments?

Come on, you KNOW the answer Comrade MENSA. :)


C, why argue with coaster? I thought I read where he/it was an admitted communist. If this is correct then everything he/it writes will be based on these principles and not worth any argument. It may be best to just ignore he/it!


There you go thinking again. You might want to hang on to that two cents!


Re: "C, why argue with coaster?"

Why not? He's the only half-ways intelligent lefty in the bunch on these comment pages.

At college, I used to have debates over coffee with the head of the local chapter of the Communist Party.

coasterfan refers to himself as a Progressive, i.e. Fabian socialist.


As I've often written:

Marx and Engles synonymously used the terms socialism and communism.


Under close inspection and argumentation, socialism will ALWAYS collapse as an economic theory because it's an unworkable system without the use of brute force.

Over the past several decades, hundreds of millions have died at the hands of tyrants attempting to make society "fair and equitable."

See: "The Black Book of Communism."