In cutting the forecast of the 10 year surplus by $4 trillion, from last year's forecast of $5.6 to the current forecast of $1.6 trillion, the Congressional Budget office allots the blame as follows:
$1,280 billion to the Bush tax cut
$929 billion to the recession
$562 billion to increased interest on the national debt
$550 billion to higher spending
My question is: I could swear Max said the original forecasts included one recession occuring over that 10 year period. But the firgures above make it look like it was a big surprise to them that a recession would come soon after what was already the longest boom in post-war history. And it hasn't been a very bad recession either, so far GNP-wise, has it?
So my first impression is that the original forecast had a trillion dollar transparent gimmick in it, namely pretending there wouldn't be a recession soon. Is this wrong?
Michael
__________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com