Plus our current policy is socialism for the rich, hence the deficit.
Plus our current policy is socialism for the rich, hence the deficit.
Runningart2004 wrote:
L L wrote:
No, you really don’t need a balanced budget.
Whether the budget is balanced or not, the government gets the money from tax payers to fund everything.
If the budget is balanced, the wealthy make up the difference in extra taxes that is their expense that they don’t get back.
If the budget is not balanced, the wealthy make up the difference by buying govt bonds that is an asset to them until they sell later and someone else buys.
Cutting government spending is bad because wherever you cut it is a pay cut for someone.
Be specific when you say you want to cut spending and say exactly whose pocket you want to take the money from.
It’s not easy.
Thanks for the explanation.
But is that sustainable forever? Is the deficit just a political football?
Alan
Well, US debt has increased every single year since 1957.
Even the couple of surplus budget years yielded negative cash flow.
So, it seems that it can be sustainable forever as long as there is usually economic growth or some inflation.
Of course, you couldn't have unlimited debt because you have to be able to meet your payment obligations and you need income for that so you have to have enough taxes coming in.
As liberal as I am, I do feel the economy runs best on its own and a free market should determine how that goes.
But the economy does need a prod now and then and it certainly needs rules and regulations.
And the best way to prod the economy is spending on programs that create work, tax breaks for low earners and some welfare because all of that gets spent immediately back into the economy and business owners reap immediate benefits as well.
I fear that tax cuts for the wealthy and big businesses often goes to savings and not stimulus.
L L wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
Thanks for the explanation.
But is that sustainable forever? Is the deficit just a political football?
Alan
Well, US debt has increased every single year since 1957.
Even the couple of surplus budget years yielded negative cash flow.
So, it seems that it can be sustainable forever as long as there is usually economic growth or some inflation.
Of course, you couldn't have unlimited debt because you have to be able to meet your payment obligations and you need income for that so you have to have enough taxes coming in.
As liberal as I am, I do feel the economy runs best on its own and a free market should determine how that goes.
But the economy does need a prod now and then and it certainly needs rules and regulations.
And the best way to prod the economy is spending on programs that create work, tax breaks for low earners and some welfare because all of that gets spent immediately back into the economy and business owners reap immediate benefits as well.
I fear that tax cuts for the wealthy and big businesses often goes to savings and not stimulus.
I suggest you break your windows every year and contribute to the ecomoney!
You did not pay enough in taxes, you do not deserve anything wrote:
The major problem with the modern GOP is they claim to be fiscally conservative but are really very fiscally irresponsible. Politically they know that tax cuts play to their base. They also know that when their base screams for “spending cuts” what their base means is “cut everyone’s benefits but MINE”. Cutting Medicare and social security—which needs to happen right NOW and which needs to be applied to BOOMERS and CURRENT retirees—would be political suicide for the GOP despite all their rhetoric on spending. Thus, the major problem with GOP tax cuts is they NEVER “get to govt spending cuts” that they promise and they never will.
How dumb are people? Why do they forget so quickly? The modern GOP is NOT fiscally conservative. They have cut taxes before—several times in most of our lifetimes—and they NEVER get to cutting spending.
I suppose a tax cut would be fine IF they passed legislation slashing government spending FIRST. In other words, cut spending by X amount so they know how much less revenue they’ll be taking in and then give X amount back to tax payers. But that’s not what happens. We’ve seen this playbook before—recently.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress AND had a GOP POTUS for 6 of the 8 Bush II years—this was not that long ago, the early 2000s. They passed a massive tax cut. What else did they do? Well they 1) said the tax cuts would “pay for themselves by driving economic growth (aka magical thinking) 2) they simultaneously MASSIVELY INCREASED government spending!
What happened? We had a short term boom followed by a MASSIVE economic collapse AND a MASSIVE increase in the national debt. But since the economic collapse happened several years later dumb people with short attention spans that are obsessed with tax cuts who think that the minute tax legislation is passed the full effect of said tax legislation is felt—are and where mentally unable to connect the collapse to the very bad tax & spend policies of the GOP.
So, what is happening now? 1) the GOP is saying the same thing about “tax cuts paying for themselves” by driving economic growth 2) CEOs are smart and know that if they throw peons short term benefits (like a one time bonus rather than a permanent increase in worker salaries...which are peanuts to the CEOs and which do nothing to address the real issue of wage stagnation) that they can connect that to the tax cuts and say “see trickle down works! What’s good for corporations is good for individuals”...meanwhile those same corporations pocket > 90% of the benefit from the tax cut 3) the GOP is proposing MASSIVE increases in defense spending, infrastructure spending, and spending for a southern “boarder” wall with no plan to pay for any of it.
These tax cuts will have the same effect as prior cuts—a huge increase in the national debt and an eventual economic collapse that disproportionately effects individuals (who, yeah, got a short term increase in $) while corporations make out like bandits (their cuts are permanent). Plus, all the benefits (short term) will be attributed to the current admin, while the long term effects will be blamed on whomever is in office when the $hit hits the fan in several years.
Why do you tax obsess Morans not understand that at this point in our history the ONLY rational approach is an INCREASE in taxes coupled with a DECREASE in spending. We owe too much already to get tax cuts. Tax cuts are a bad idea, fiscally irresponsible, and morally reprehensible.
Subprime mortgages caused the financial crisis. It had nothing to do with cutting taxes or deficit spending. It caused a WORLDWIDE recession. All because of deregulation and greed. Capitalism at its finest.
Alan
Highest American perception of US world image since 2003. Imagine that.
You did not pay enough in taxes, you do not deserve anything wrote:
The major problem with the modern GOP is they claim to be fiscally conservative but are really very fiscally irresponsible. Politically they know that tax cuts play to their base. They also know that when their base screams for “spending cuts” what their base means is “cut everyone’s benefits but MINE”. Cutting Medicare and social security—which needs to happen right NOW and which needs to be applied to BOOMERS and CURRENT retirees—would be political suicide for the GOP despite all their rhetoric on spending. Thus, the major problem with GOP tax cuts is they NEVER “get to govt spending cuts” that they promise and they never will.
How dumb are people? Why do they forget so quickly? The modern GOP is NOT fiscally conservative. They have cut taxes before—several times in most of our lifetimes—and they NEVER get to cutting spending.
I suppose a tax cut would be fine IF they passed legislation slashing government spending FIRST. In other words, cut spending by X amount so they know how much less revenue they’ll be taking in and then give X amount back to tax payers. But that’s not what happens. We’ve seen this playbook before—recently.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress AND had a GOP POTUS for 6 of the 8 Bush II years—this was not that long ago, the early 2000s. They passed a massive tax cut. What else did they do? Well they 1) said the tax cuts would “pay for themselves by driving economic growth (aka magical thinking) 2) they simultaneously MASSIVELY INCREASED government spending!
What happened? We had a short term boom followed by a MASSIVE economic collapse AND a MASSIVE increase in the national debt. But since the economic collapse happened several years later dumb people with short attention spans that are obsessed with tax cuts who think that the minute tax legislation is passed the full effect of said tax legislation is felt—are and where mentally unable to connect the collapse to the very bad tax & spend policies of the GOP.
So, what is happening now? 1) the GOP is saying the same thing about “tax cuts paying for themselves” by driving economic growth 2) CEOs are smart and know that if they throw peons short term benefits (like a one time bonus rather than a permanent increase in worker salaries...which are peanuts to the CEOs and which do nothing to address the real issue of wage stagnation) that they can connect that to the tax cuts and say “see trickle down works! What’s good for corporations is good for individuals”...meanwhile those same corporations pocket > 90% of the benefit from the tax cut 3) the GOP is proposing MASSIVE increases in defense spending, infrastructure spending, and spending for a southern “boarder” wall with no plan to pay for any of it.
These tax cuts will have the same effect as prior cuts—a huge increase in the national debt and an eventual economic collapse that disproportionately effects individuals (who, yeah, got a short term increase in $) while corporations make out like bandits (their cuts are permanent). Plus, all the benefits (short term) will be attributed to the current admin, while the long term effects will be blamed on whomever is in office when the $hit hits the fan in several years.
Why do you tax obsess Morans not understand that at this point in our history the ONLY rational approach is an INCREASE in taxes coupled with a DECREASE in spending. We owe too much already to get tax cuts. Tax cuts are a bad idea, fiscally irresponsible, and morally reprehensible.
Good post.
They NEVER get to cutting spending because they conveniently have blown up the economy with their mindset of deregulation and fiscal irresponsibility - so I guess the sell is they WOULD cut spending if they ever stopped shooting themselves in the foot first? The Republican discs responsibility claim is pure garbage and a tota contradiction. But they get to hide behind their finger pointing of those “socialists trying to destroy capitalism”.
You did not pay enough in taxes, you do not deserve anything wrote:
The major problem with the modern GOP is they claim to be fiscally conservative but are really very fiscally irresponsible. Politically they know that tax cuts play to their base. They also know that when their base screams for “spending cuts” what their base means is “cut everyone’s benefits but MINE”. Cutting Medicare and social security—which needs to happen right NOW and which needs to be applied to BOOMERS and CURRENT retirees—would be political suicide for the GOP despite all their rhetoric on spending. Thus, the major problem with GOP tax cuts is they NEVER “get to govt spending cuts” that they promise and they never will.
How dumb are people? Why do they forget so quickly? The modern GOP is NOT fiscally conservative. They have cut taxes before—several times in most of our lifetimes—and they NEVER get to cutting spending.
I suppose a tax cut would be fine IF they passed legislation slashing government spending FIRST. In other words, cut spending by X amount so they know how much less revenue they’ll be taking in and then give X amount back to tax payers. But that’s not what happens. We’ve seen this playbook before—recently.
The GOP controlled both houses of Congress AND had a GOP POTUS for 6 of the 8 Bush II years—this was not that long ago, the early 2000s. They passed a massive tax cut. What else did they do? Well they 1) said the tax cuts would “pay for themselves by driving economic growth (aka magical thinking) 2) they simultaneously MASSIVELY INCREASED government spending!
What happened? We had a short term boom followed by a MASSIVE economic collapse AND a MASSIVE increase in the national debt. But since the economic collapse happened several years later dumb people with short attention spans that are obsessed with tax cuts who think that the minute tax legislation is passed the full effect of said tax legislation is felt—are and where mentally unable to connect the collapse to the very bad tax & spend policies of the GOP.
So, what is happening now? 1) the GOP is saying the same thing about “tax cuts paying for themselves” by driving economic growth 2) CEOs are smart and know that if they throw peons short term benefits (like a one time bonus rather than a permanent increase in worker salaries...which are peanuts to the CEOs and which do nothing to address the real issue of wage stagnation) that they can connect that to the tax cuts and say “see trickle down works! What’s good for corporations is good for individuals”...meanwhile those same corporations pocket > 90% of the benefit from the tax cut 3) the GOP is proposing MASSIVE increases in defense spending, infrastructure spending, and spending for a southern “boarder” wall with no plan to pay for any of it.
These tax cuts will have the same effect as prior cuts—a huge increase in the national debt and an eventual economic collapse that disproportionately effects individuals (who, yeah, got a short term increase in $) while corporations make out like bandits (their cuts are permanent). Plus, all the benefits (short term) will be attributed to the current admin, while the long term effects will be blamed on whomever is in office when the $hit hits the fan in several years.
Why do you tax obsess Morans not understand that at this point in our history the ONLY rational approach is an INCREASE in taxes coupled with a DECREASE in spending. We owe too much already to get tax cuts. Tax cuts are a bad idea, fiscally irresponsible, and morally reprehensible.
This is incorrect.
The Democrats never want to cut taxes. That should tell you everything you posted is nonsense. Given the choice between cutting taxes and nothing, the Republicans choose to cut taxes. The Republicans call this a compromise. If the Democrats were in power, they would tax everyone 90% and *****STILL***** spend more than they take in. It is in their nature.
This deficit spending works because we export inflation to other parts of the world, backed by the most powerful military in the world. Eventually, it wont work. Poorer nations are not able to export inflation, so they are screwed.
_its_baddude wrote:
The Democrats never want to cut taxes.
Obama put in a number of tax cuts in the 2009 stimulus and a 2% payroll tax in 2012 for a two year period.
And he made the Bush tax cuts permanent for all but the highest tier.
L L wrote:
_its_baddude wrote:
The Democrats never want to cut taxes.
Obama put in a number of tax cuts in the 2009 stimulus and a 2% payroll tax in 2012 for a two year period.
And he made the Bush tax cuts permanent for all but the highest tier.
Yep. Total BS that Democrats don't ever want to cut taxes, and also total BS that Republicans don't ever want to raise taxes. Here in Ohio, our newly-elected Republican governor wants to raise taxes on gas by 18 cents per gallon. As a personal financial matter, this means nothing to me, but as a philosophical matter, that seems excessive and potentially hurtful to those who don't make much money or rely on their vehicle to make money.
The issue with Republicans is that they campaign as fiscal conservatives and they are not.
They raise deficits as much as or more than Democrats.
Both parties fail to meet campaign promises but Republicans have a major platform designed to fail on what they promise.
But wait a second wrote:
Highest American perception of US world image since 2003. Imagine that.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/247064/americans-perceptions-world-image-best-2003.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=LEAD&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Americans%27%2520Perceptions%2520of%2520U.S.%2520World%2520Image%2520Best%2520Since%25202003
Just to be clear, this is measuring how Americans think the rest of the world views us.
It is not measuring what the rest of the world actually thinks.
Yeah, sure, tens of millions of ignorant American rubes think Trump has renewed global respect in America. They believe everything Trump tells them. But those tens of millions of rubes are wrong. Foreign views of America have plummeted since Trump took office and started tearing up international agreements.
agip wrote:
But wait a second wrote:
Highest American perception of US world image since 2003. Imagine that.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/247064/americans-perceptions-world-image-best-2003.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=LEAD&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Americans%27%2520Perceptions%2520of%2520U.S.%2520World%2520Image%2520Best%2520Since%25202003Just to be clear, this is measuring how Americans think the rest of the world views us.
It is not measuring what the rest of the world actually thinks.
Yeah, sure, tens of millions of ignorant American rubes think Trump has renewed global respect in America. They believe everything Trump tells them. But those tens of millions of rubes are wrong. Foreign views of America have plummeted since Trump took office and started tearing up international agreements.
It has definitely plummeted. Trump ranks right up there as one of the biggest $hit stains in America’s history. Every time he opens his mouth our reputation worsens. Every time he lies through his teeth we lose more credibility. Every time he appeases a dictator and comes home empty handed he looks like a bufoon. To outsiders it’s all looking like the circus that it really is. But mouth breathers don’t care how awful he is, as long as he sticks it to the libs and displays non-apologetic machismo. Those are the factors they are most concerned with. I do think a lot of Trumpers have had a clear change of heart based on the midterm whooping the GOP got.
Of course trumpers will just say they don’t give a damn what any foreigners think. They are very stupid for thinking that way. How can we be the world’s leading nation if we have no respect? It doesn’t work. We have Macron proposing a European army, China doing laps around us in every country we’ve diplomatically abandoned, Russia has had a green light to keel and grabbing... as far as most world leaders are concerned Trump is on the weak sauce diet.
agip wrote:
But wait a second wrote:
Highest American perception of US world image since 2003. Imagine that.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/247064/americans-perceptions-world-image-best-2003.aspx?g_source=link_NEWSV9&g_medium=LEAD&g_campaign=item_&g_content=Americans%27%2520Perceptions%2520of%2520U.S.%2520World%2520Image%2520Best%2520Since%25202003Just to be clear, this is measuring how Americans think the rest of the world views us.
It is not measuring what the rest of the world actually thinks.
Yeah, sure, tens of millions of ignorant American rubes think Trump has renewed global respect in America. They believe everything Trump tells them. But those tens of millions of rubes are wrong. Foreign views of America have plummeted since Trump took office and started tearing up international agreements.
Correct - This headline should read 'Trumpees are more clueless then any group of Americans since 2003'
Remember that in 2003 many Mericans would have been hyped on 'Invade Iraq Meth' thinking we were saving the world from Saddam.
Flagpole wrote:
L L wrote:
Obama put in a number of tax cuts in the 2009 stimulus and a 2% payroll tax in 2012 for a two year period.
And he made the Bush tax cuts permanent for all but the highest tier.
Yep. Total BS that Democrats don't ever want to cut taxes, and also total BS that Republicans don't ever want to raise taxes. Here in Ohio, our newly-elected Republican governor wants to raise taxes on gas by 18 cents per gallon. As a personal financial matter, this means nothing to me, but as a philosophical matter, that seems excessive and potentially hurtful to those who don't make much money or rely on their vehicle to make money.
Those of us who have gone green don't worry about gas prices or gas taxes.
Enjoy filling up your gas guzzler every week.
Runningart2004 wrote:
P wrote:
I find the analysis to be terribly simplistic. Take this paragraph as an example:
"In short, federal debt is the least of the U.S.’s problems. As evidenced by plummeting yields on the 10-year over the decades, investors figure that future debt servicing will be exceedingly easy. As for reasons why, the speculation from here is that we’re on the verge of a staggering productivity boom thanks to amazing advances in technological pursuits of the automation and robotics variety. Figure that if the discovery of dirty, prosaic coal rendered American workers twenty times more productive, imagine what internet, automation and robotic advances will mean for our future output. It’s just a guess, but these surges in our individual capacity to create will unleash stunning wealth creation on a level that we can’t presently contemplate such that Treasury debts will become exceedingly small."
Not exactly what one might consider to be hard logic and sound evidence. Basically, it is "Hey, the market knows best and it says 'no worries'" garnished with a bit of "Hey, there's going to be this miracle that "we can't presently contemplate."
Deficits do matter. More importantly, the debt does matter. And markets invariably "have infinite wisdom and foresight and have already priced in future risks inherent in enormous debt levels so there is nothing to worry about" . . . until there is. Every single bubble that has ever existed has been justified as "this time is different" and there was never anything to worry about because just look at how the market is pricing this stuff until . . .
So at what point will deficits matter? The national debt rose $1.2 trillion in 2018. So we’re adding a trillion a year now. Awesome.
Alan
That is a reasonable question. Unfortunately it is not readily answerable. It is the same as with every bubble ever. One can see it. One can know it is going to have a bad ending. But guessing exactly when that bad ending is going to come is a fool's errand.
Put another way: The whole thing is driven by market dynamics which are invariably driven in the short term by mob psychology - which is predictable in the meta but notoriously unpredictable in the micro.
”My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.
Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position.” - James Mattis, US Marine Corps General
P wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
So at what point will deficits matter? The national debt rose $1.2 trillion in 2018. So we’re adding a trillion a year now. Awesome.
Alan
That is a reasonable question. Unfortunately it is not readily answerable. It is the same as with every bubble ever. One can see it. One can know it is going to have a bad ending. But guessing exactly when that bad ending is going to come is a fool's errand.
Put another way: The whole thing is driven by market dynamics which are invariably driven in the short term by mob psychology - which is predictable in the meta but notoriously unpredictable in the micro.
one of my favorite investing sayings fits here - "deficits are ok...until they aren't.'
Meaning borrowing is great until something happens and the merde hits the fan and then everything is terrible. But you never know when that is going to happen, and you don't know what will cause it.
Think of the financial crisis - it was great...all that money freed up from housing and all that value created. The economy did well with the bubble. Until it didn't.
Just for everyone's edification:
Mueller is coming.
The clown is done.
agip wrote:
P wrote:
That is a reasonable question. Unfortunately it is not readily answerable. It is the same as with every bubble ever. One can see it. One can know it is going to have a bad ending. But guessing exactly when that bad ending is going to come is a fool's errand.
Put another way: The whole thing is driven by market dynamics which are invariably driven in the short term by mob psychology - which is predictable in the meta but notoriously unpredictable in the micro.
one of my favorite investing sayings fits here - "deficits are ok...until they aren't.'
Meaning borrowing is great until something happens and the merde hits the fan and then everything is terrible. But you never know when that is going to happen, and you don't know what will cause it.
Think of the financial crisis - it was great...all that money freed up from housing and all that value created. The economy did well with the bubble. Until it didn't.
meh. you can say that about virtually anything.
Flagpole wrote:
Just for everyone's edification:
Mueller is coming.
The clown is done.
Flagpole ... that proclamation is soooo 2018. Time to get with the times. It appears that AOC may see the inside of a prison cell before the Donald.
1:49.84 - 800m Freshmen National Record - Cooper Lutkenhaus (check this kick out!!)
Men who run twice a day and the women who love/put up with them
Jakob on Oly 1500- “Walk in the park if I don’t get injured or sick”
VALBY has graduated (w/ honors) from Florida, will she go to grad school??
Emma Coburn to miss Olympic Trials after breaking ankle in Suzhou