Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
Visit polecolaw's column >>

POLECOLAW

Home Page
Articles Posted: 82  Links Seeded: 55
Member Since: 10/2007  Last Seen: 1/19/2012

What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Federal Budget for 2006

Wed Jan 9, 2008 6:00 PM EST
politics, health-care, taxes, budget, tax, medicare, social-security, retirement, medicaid, national-defense
By polecolaw

Approximate and excluding Unemployment Insurance (both in and out).

Approximate and excluding Unemployment Insurance (both in and out).

Advertise | AdChoices

Here are the rest of the federal budget numbers re-classified in a way that I think makes them understandable. They are approximate because the government figures use varying classifications depending upon where you get the numbers from. These amounts also ignore unemployment insurance, but the net impact of doing so is relatively small. The inflows are without including any payroll taxes as that is dealt with in the Social Security and Health Care pieces referred to below. Outflows are without Social Security and the portion of Medicare paid for by payroll deductions. My hope was to isolate those programs from the other government programs that we fund through general revenues rather than payroll taxes that fund Social Security and a portion of Medicare. By doing it this way, if you want to know how much you are paying toward any particular item you can get a very rough estimate by multiplying the amount you paid in federal income tax times the percentage to the right of the outflow category (plus your share of the additional national debt used to fund the shortfall, so add another 30% or so).

Interest expense is not "net interest" because the portion that the government considers a wash (about $169 billion) is "paid" to trust funds like Social Security but then immediately re-borrowed. Because of this the government accounting figures a net interest amount as though it really wasn't paid. In any event, about $100 billion of the interest expense is paying the interest on the money borrowed from Social Security, so if you like you can add that to your retirement costs.

Non-SS Mandatory Income Security includes all of the means tested entitlements.

The difference between the inflow and outflow explains the additional half trillion or so of national debt from end of year 2005 to end of year 2006 (approximately $574 billion).

A final note - to really understand who benefits and who pays in our system it is necessary to go beyond a simple inflow/outflow analysis. It requires a real analysis of the tax code to understand who is getting a better deal and who is not. One example of this is the capital gains treatment of carried interest for hedge fund and private equity managers that allows them to pay 15% on large portions of their (often seven figure) incomes. I hope, however, that this analysis provides some insight.

For health care numbers go here.
For Social Security go here.
For Welfare figures go here.

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • polecolaw's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: Business Vine, DemGuys, Dismal Scientists
  • Regions: none
  • Public Discussion (17)
polecolaw

OK, I'm finished!

  • 5 votes
Reply#1 - Wed Jan 9, 2008 6:06 PM EST
Blitzen

re-classified in a way that I think makes them understandable

...and that's why I love your articles, 19.64% of the budget is to pay the interest to service the national debt? Am I understanding that correctly?

  • 2 votes
Reply#2 - Wed Jan 9, 2008 10:18 PM EST
polecolaw

Hey Blitzen. Thats correct, however as reported by the government the "budget" includes revenue from payroll taxes and outlays for SS benefits and Medicare Part A (and b and d). So, what I did was take those out to give us a picture of what the budget looks like when we take out the payroll taxes and what they pay for and look at everything else.

If we added back in Social Security and the portion of Medicare paid from payroll taxes the budget would be larger by about $770.3 billion dollars, and the percentages would change accordingly. Of the $770.3 billion, $226.4 would be added to the health care line and there would be a new Social Security line for $543.9 billion. Revenues would increase by about $790 billion from payroll taxes. If you did that then interest expense as a percentage of the budget including payroll taxes and related outlays would be about 14.3% of the total. (This ignores about $40 billion on each side for unemployment insurance - just got too complicated to worry about it.)

I hope that's clear. If not let me know. It's very confusing but I am trying to isolate the payroll tax vs. everything else.

  • 3 votes
Reply#3 - Wed Jan 9, 2008 11:29 PM EST
Blitzen

Thanks, very interesting, I can't say I've ever looked at the U.S federal budget before, and I have very basic knowledge of accounting, but 20% of ones budget just to service a debt seems like a lot to me and somewhat dangerous, especially when the budget is over 1 trillion dollars and there is still a deficit... what came to my mind were the many more productive things that money could have been used for. That's money that can't be reinvested for economic or social growth

  • 3 votes
#3.1 - Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:47 AM EST
polecolaw

Amen. BTW, if you take interest expense as a percent of REVENUE (x-payroll taxes) you get 25.9%.

  • 2 votes
#3.2 - Thu Jan 10, 2008 1:00 AM EST
othDeleted
polecolaw

As debt matures and new debt is issued the rates change, but the outstanding debt is fixed rate.

  • 1 vote
#3.4 - Sun Jan 13, 2008 12:53 PM EST
Reply
ShaunV

A final note - to really understand who benefits and who pays in our system it is necessary to go beyond a simple inflow/outflow analysis. It requires a real analysis of the tax code to understand who is getting a better deal and who is not. One example of this is the capital gains treatment of carried interest for hedge fund and private equity managers that allows them to pay 15% on large portions of their (often seven figure) incomes. I hope, however, that this analysis provides some insight.

Informative article. PC.

  • 5 votes
Reply#4 - Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:59 PM EST
polecolaw

Thanks Shaun! I am hoping to build somewhat of a record for future reference in some of the political discussion about the Vine. Seems all too common we are debating opinion without enough of the facts on either side.

  • 5 votes
#4.1 - Thu Jan 10, 2008 2:27 PM EST
ShaunV

Seems all too common we are debating opinion without enough of the facts on either side.

I hear ya'

It has been that way since I arrived here. :)

  • 4 votes
#4.2 - Thu Jan 10, 2008 3:11 PM EST
othDeleted
Reply
agio

This doesn't include "supplemental spending" on Iraq, does it?

  • 2 votes
Reply#5 - Sat Jan 19, 2008 8:09 AM EST
polecolaw

No. The actual financial statement ends up a bit different, but also makes the "net interest" and some other things difficult to find. The actual financials are here. I think it gets up to $634 billion total Department of Defence.

  • 4 votes
#5.1 - Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:05 PM EST
Reply
othDeleted
Leave a Comment:
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
(XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
Newsvine Privacy Statement
As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
FUN STUFF:
  • Leaderboard |
  • E-Mail Alerts |
  • Top of the Vine |
  • Newsvine Live |
  • Newsvine Archives |
  • The Greenhouse |
COMPANY STUFF:
  • Code of Honor |
  • Company Info |
  • Contact Us |
  • Jobs |
  • User Agreement |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • About our ads
LEGAL STUFF:
  • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
  • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com