47.6 versus 26 million. and the balance sheet, we were in a whole lot less trouble back then, bottom line, and a whole lot less spending on the part of the feds then vs. now, and the debt was half then what it is now. consumer confidence was higher than it is now. but again, i want to stress, that was all before everything hit the fan. does that mean we are on the precipice of hitting the fan? let s turn to craig smith. what do you make of that? well, big difference five years makes, neil. of course the big difference is a fed that expands a balance sheet from about a billion you know, $89 billion to somewhere around $3 trillion,. neil: does that mean that means federal reserve has been providing a great deal of stimulus to this economy. obviously to this market. it was barely doing it five years ago. it s doing it on steroids almost
$85 billion that are split evenly between the domestic side and military pentagon spending or the president s demand for an increase in taxes then let the sequester happen. are they wrong about that? i think so. i think we should in a bipartisan fashion stop see questions traiks before in the words of the dvd of defens secf defense detroys the pentagon. we can cut spending in the next decade without detroying the defense department if we choose. the president promised in the campaign sequestration would not happen. now, he is allowing it to happen and raising taxes to pay for half of it and the other half comes from further defense cuts. we already cut $489 billion and taking money out of the farm bill. when the president says we cut spending by $2.5 trillion. that is absolutely a misleading statement. chris: why? well, because we haven t. we haven t done anything with
$85 billion that are split evenly between the domestic side and military pentagon spending or the president s demand for an increase in taxes then let the sequester happen. are they wrong about that? i think so. i think we should in a bipartisan fashion stop see questions traiks before in the words of the dvd of defens secf defense detroys the pentagon. we can cut spending in the next decade without detroying the defense department if we choose. the president promised in the campaign sequestration would not happen. now, he is allowing it to happen and raising taxes to pay for half of it and the other half comes from further defense cuts. we already cut $489 billion and taking money out of the farm bill. when the president says we cut spending by $2.5 trillion. that is absolutely a misleading statement. chris: why? well, because we haven t. we haven t done anything with
$85 billion that are split evenly between the domestic side and military pentagon spending or the president s demand for an increase in taxes then let the sequester happen. are they wrong about that? i think so. i think we should in a bipartisan fashion stop see questions traiks before in the words of the dvd of defens secf defense detroys the pentagon. we can cut spending in the next decade without detroying the defense department if we choose. the president promised in the campaign sequestration would not happen. now, he is allowing it to happen and raising taxes to pay for half of it and the other half comes from further defense cuts. we already cut $489 billion and taking money out of the farm bill. when the president says we cut spending by $2.5 trillion. that is absolutely a misleading statement. chris: why? well, because we haven t. we haven t done anything with
automatic cuts. defense cuts. domestic cuts. what is going to happen to that? are they going to address that? i was called by leon panetta last night at 7:30 during dinner. chris: secretary of defense. and he said i was told there will not be anything in the deal to avoid se sequestration from going into effect. half of the 1.2 falls on defense. we already cut $489 billion. he says if we do this it will be shoot the defense department in the head and we will have to send out 800,000 layoff notices at the beginning of the year. he is worried we will destroy the finest military in the world at the time we need it the most and this doesn t cover defense cuts on top of the ones we already have. chris: briefly will you go for a deal that deals with taxes but doesn t deal with sequester. this is a deal without