A Booming Surplus

[mrjurrs]

Again, your narrative doesn't match the data. Trump's tax changes didn't result in a decline in federal revenue. In fact that trailing two year revenue growth exceed the prior two year revenue growth, all while increasing employment, labor participation, and crucially the low income wage growth statistics. Compare that to Biden's first year, shall we? The lower and middle class are seeing real wage declines and shortages. Neat, right?



I take it you are not particularly well read on the subject then? It's simple, demographics.

China has an aging problem that is going to become critical in 8-12 years by most arithmetic. At which point they will have a nation that is generally considered too old to bear a major military/economic conflict. Combine this with the rapid and vast expansion of their navy and air force, which will become much more expensive to maintain and support as the years go by and it just isn't hard to see the time window. Go read about it, pretty much every military and intelligence analyst comes to the same conclusion. A later summer/early fall invasion in the next ten years is pretty much the guess.

Then it ought to be easy for someone as well read as you to provide sources supporting your opinion.

 

[Ishm]

The first party to record a future surplus will be the one that finally fixes out of control health care costs. Without likely unachievable bipartisan changes to mandatory spending, the only national expense big enough to carve out the deficit amount from is healthcare. It's also one of the fastest growing federal expenses. Bring healthcare costs down to something close to the OECD average (say maybe only 33% above instead of 100% above or more) and the deficit is gone. In fact, at even 1.5 times the OECD average the pre covid deficit is a surplus.

There is no other federal expenditure other than SS or the military where you can do enough to truly impact a $trillion annual deficit. SS isn't going to get slashed, and in fact will continue to increase in the short/medium term. Unless you virtually eliminate the military (not going to happen), that isn't going to make a real dent in the deficit either. All the welfare programs, education etc that conservatives like to focus on are just pinples on the deficit pumpkin, but great distractions from havibg to address the real issues which are to them politically harmful if they did anything.

Want to see surplusses again, fix the staggeringly high cost of healthcare. It's the highest single 'tax' on the US economy. Imagine if it cost the OECD average and sn extra $2Trillion was released into the productive economy each year.......

The reality is that US can not afford to let different interest groups keep saying that their particular interests are untouchable and buying enough political influence to achieve that goal. Any fix that corrects a $trillion deficit is going to be painful. The most obvious, and likely least painful is to cut the fat out of healthcare. The US might even move out of last place on OECD life expectancy. The only other viable alternative is an effective 25% lift in tax revenue. Maybe even 30% once you allow for growing SS and Healthcare costs. What's your pick?

 

[jonny5]

Wow you guys, all I can say is,... "Beam me up Scotty, there's no intelligent life down here."

ok

 

[jonny5]

A lot more than that when you include VA, Medicaid, Medicare, etc.

70% includes all of that. Probably should exclude the VA, though.

 

[bave]

Then it ought to be easy for someone as well read as you to provide sources supporting your opinion.

www.google.com

There are tons of sources on this, I am not going to spoon feed children on the internet. If you want the information it is out there. Go read a number of the RAND or StratFOR reports.

 

[Good4Nothin]

A Booming Surplus:

What do you think kids, who will lead us to a booming surplus?

We had it under Clinton, we were on that road with Obama, and now we're on it with Biden, coming out of the pandemic and we're twenty years and thirty-trillion dollars behind.

It's the only thing that works, it's the only thing that matters; go Democrats.

Hold the champaign. It's very likely Biden will preside over the biggest stock market crash and financial crisis yet.

 

[mrjurrs]

www.google.com

There are tons of sources on this, I am not going to spoon feed children on the internet. If you want the information it is out there. Go read a number of the RAND or StratFOR reports.

You really don't understand do you. You make the claim, you support it. If you choose not to support it, that's fine. It just goes into the bloviating ignoramus file.

 

[rahl]

Trump did what exactly? His tax reform increased federal revenue, increased labor participation, increased employment and grew wages amongst the lower side earners higher than in decades. Not bad, no?

you can in no way demonstrate this to be true. Every metric grew at the same pace as the previous 8 years, other than the deficit and debt. That skyrocketed under trump. Revenues increase year over year regardless unless there is a recession. Had taxes not been cut, revenues would have been greater. We know this, because the economy grew at the same pace after the cuts as it did before.

 

[cpwill]

A Booming Surplus:

What do you think kids, who will lead us to a booming surplus?

We had it under Clinton, we were on that road with Obama, and now we're on it with Biden, coming out of the pandemic and we're twenty years and thirty-trillion dollars behind.

It's the only thing that works, it's the only thing that matters; go Democrats.

We were not on that road with Obama, and Clinton's was based on taking money from Social Security.

Neither party is interested in actually doing what will become necessary.

 

[bave]

You really don't understand do you. You make the claim, you support it. If you choose not to support it, that's fine. It just goes into the bloviating ignoramus file.

I have seen this game before. No matter what someone posts you are going to either misrepresent it, call it bias, or simply have an emotional outburst in the face of the facts. If you want to educate yourself and actually understand the geopolitical strategic situation, then please do so. I am not inclined to sit here and try to explain a few thousand pages of reading and reports to someone who simply doesn't have the desire and/or ability to comprehend it.

I am not sure what makes you so certain of your own point of view honestly. Is it ignorance? Stupidity? Laziness? Pick one or multiple, I don't care.

you can in no way demonstrate this to be true. Every metric grew at the same pace as the previous 8 years, other than the deficit and debt. That skyrocketed under trump. Revenues increase year over year regardless unless there is a recession. Had taxes not been cut, revenues would have been greater. We know this, because the economy grew at the same pace after the cuts as it did before.

www.irs.gov

The fact that you think "every metric grew at the same pace as the previous 8 years" is outright comical. That has never, not once, happened in the economic history of the United States. The amount of ignorance displayed here is simply mind boggling.

There is so much data that will disprove your idea that "had taxes not been cut revenues would have been greater" it is amazing.

Bravo, really takes skill to be this thoroughly wrong. It is almost as though you know the right answer and spent time trying to avoid it.

 

[Ishm]

I have seen this game before. No matter what someone posts you are going to either misrepresent it, call it bias, or simply have an emotional outburst in the face of the facts. If you want to educate yourself and actually understand the geopolitical strategic situation, then please do so. I am not inclined to sit here and try to explain a few thousand pages of reading and reports .......

There is so much data that will disprove your idea that "had taxes not been cut revenues would have been greater" it is amazing.

Bravo, really takes skill to be this thoroughly wrong. It is almost as though you know the right answer and spent time trying to avoid it.

Can you share some of this complex data you possess with us? Reason I ask is because when corrected for the higher inflation caused by Trumps economic policies, federal tax income shrunk between 2016 and 2019, contributing of course to the increased deficit as the cost of federal spending grew with inflation. On the other hand, during Obamas 2nd term, directly preceding Trump, federal revenue grew significantly faster than inflation.

You can fairly debate the other upsides of Trumps tax cuts, but saying that they improved federal income or aided the deficit will need a whole lot of real factual evidence when the top line numbers show that federal income under Trump shrunk in real dollar terms. My analysis says that Trump supplied the economy with a short term 'sugar fix' by increasing the deficit to stimulate consumption.

I can also show that when corrected for the increased deficit borrowing and inflation, real gdp growth under Trump was virtually non existent. What he did was borrow more money to throw at the economy and make a significant contribution towards setting the economy even further behind than when he took office. Growth via increased debt provides a non sustainsble lift that only makes people feel good until the debt gets called in. You could see that in the rapidly falling gdp growth predictions, coupled with increasing deficit forecasts pre covid.

Since you are the big economic reader, tell us how non investment in infastructure, pulling out of trade deals, and policies reducing population growth contribute to gdp growth. In fact, tell us how Trumps policies were going to grow real gdp without increased borrowing? Reality was a huge disconnect between Trumps popularism driven economic policies and anything that would actually grow real gdp. He made up the difference by borrowing more on the deficit. Run the numbers for yourself and prove me wrong. Happy if you can, but not sure that you will.

 

[Bullseye]

A Booming Surplus:

What do you think kids, who will lead us to a booming surplus?

We had it under Clinton, we were on that road with Obama, and now we're on it with Biden, coming out of the pandemic and we're twenty years and thirty-trillion dollars behind.
It's the only thing that works, it's the only thing that matters; go Democrats.

Clinton had a Republican Congress to guide the way. He wisely went along. Even so his "surpluses" were more to excess medicare payments than any earthshaking economic miracles.

 

[Peter]

A surplus of what?

Decent British cheese if the US has any taste.

 

[rahl]

www.irs.gov

what, specifically, supports the claims you made in this link?

The fact that you think "every metric grew at the same pace as the previous 8 years" is outright comical.

It's a matter of public record lol.

That has never, not once, happened in the economic history of the United States. The amount of ignorance displayed here is simply mind boggling.

I agree. Every time you post I am amazed by the amount of ignorance your posts contain. You throw out claims constantly, get called on them to back them up, and then you run away. It's hilarious.

There is so much data that will disprove your idea that "had taxes not been cut revenues would have been greater" it is amazing.

All you gotta do then is provide it. We both know why you won't, and can't though.

Bravo, really takes skill to be this thoroughly wrong. It is almost as though you know the right answer and spent time trying to avoid it.

I accept your concession.

 

[jonny5]

Clinton had a Republican Congress to guide the way. He wisely went along. Even so his "surpluses" were more to excess medicare payments than any earthshaking economic miracles.

Which was a result of increases wages due to the tech boom. Couple that we slowing rate of spending growth, and you get a balanced budget. Pre 90s, outlays grew about 8 per year on average. In the 90s it grew at 3%, about the same as GDP.

 

[code1211]

A Booming Surplus:

What do you think kids, who will lead us to a booming surplus?

We had it under Clinton, we were on that road with Obama, and now we're on it with Biden, coming out of the pandemic and we're twenty years and thirty-trillion dollars behind.

It's the only thing that works, it's the only thing that matters; go Democrats.

Astonishing!

Under the guidance and deception of BOTH POLITICAL PARTIES, the US has been victimized by the loss through theft by the lying thieves of about $25 Trillion since 1999.

If the increases in Federal Spending had been limited to the increases of the COLA for Social Security recipients, there would be no deficit and the National Debt would have been paid off.

Instead of looking at the cancer that is our lying thieves from both parties, you ask that we side with one gang of lying thieves or the other gang of lying thieves.

THEY ARE ALL LYING THIEVES AND BOTH PARTIES ARE AS CULPABLE. They only use their supporters to continue their theft.

Do you really not see this? WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?

 

[bave]

what, specifically, supports the claims you made in this link?

The fact that you can clearly see an uptick in federal revenue after TCJA. The growth in federal revenue in the two years following TCJA was greater than the two years preceeding it.

It's a matter of public record lol.

It sure is, and you are sure wrong. For instance, 2017 and 2018 wage growth was materially better than Obama years, and 2017 was the best year since 2017. Most Obama years were sub 2% wage gains. Moreover, the fact that you think an economy at a wider level has unchanged/flat metrics year over year is comically stupid. There are literally thousands of metrics and you think they all were the same?

I accept your concession.

That degree of hubris will keep you poor, hungry, and angry the rest of your life. I understand life is hard for you.

 

[rahl]

The fact that you can clearly see an uptick in federal revenue after TCJA. The growth in federal revenue in the two years following TCJA was greater than the two years preceeding it.

except we don't see that. It's why you can't post any data showing it.

It sure is, and you are sure wrong. For instance, 2017 and 2018 wage growth was materially better than Obama years, and 2017 was the best year since 2017. Most Obama years were sub 2% wage gains. Moreover, the fact that you think an economy at a wider level has unchanged/flat metrics year over year is comically stupid. There are literally thousands of metrics and you think they all were the same?

Every metric remained on the same unchanging trend line from 2010 until the pandemic. This is not debatable. We have the actual data showing this lol.

That degree of hubris will keep you poor, hungry, and angry the rest of your life. I understand life is hard for you.

I accept your concession again. Thank you for again admitting you can in no way support the claims you made, and have been repeatedly called on.

 

[bave]

except we don't see that. It's why you can't post any data showing it.

www.irs.gov

Do your own homework, basic searches from whatever source you want.

Every metric remained on the same unchanging trend line from 2010 until the pandemic. This is not debatable. We have the actual data showing this lol.

Incorrect, 2017 was best wage growth year since 2007, materially so. Look it up kid.

I accept your concession again. Thank you for again admitting you can in no way support the claims you made, and have been repeatedly called on.

You are aware of the internet and how it works, right?

 

[rahl]

www.irs.gov

Do your own homework, basic searches from whatever source you want.

I accept your concession. You do this every single time you are challenged, and it's still hilarious.

Incorrect, 2017 was best wage growth year since 2007, materially so. Look it up kid.

I have. And as I correctly pointed out, every metric remained on the same unchanging trend line from 2010 until the pandemic. It's not in any way debatable.

You are aware of the internet and how it works, right?

Yes. You have conceded the argument, and admitted you can not support any of the claims you've made with any evidence what so ever.

 

[bave]

I accept your concession. You do this every single time you are challenged, and it's still hilarious.

I have. And as I correctly pointed out, every metric remained on the same unchanging trend line from 2010 until the pandemic. It's not in any way debatable.

Yes. You have conceded the argument, and admitted you can not support any of the claims you've made with any evidence what so ever.

Again, I can't tell if you are lazy, illiterate, naive, or intellectually challenged. The data is all out there, sorry I am not your mommy who is going to spoonfeed you pages of data you will ignore anyway.

That's your MO, we get it, you sit here as an angry kid in your parents basement disagreeing with everyone else who doesn't share your point of view regardless of the evidence.

Like I said, life is going to be hard for you and I'm glad.

 

[rahl]

Again, I can't................................................

we get it. you got caught making silly claims and called on it, once again, and have been running furiously ever since. You do this in almost every thread. You make silly claims, someone calls you out to support them, then you of course never do, because you can't. It's amusing.

 

[Stinger]

Since I have never seen a surplus from republican control, I’ll have to defer to the democrats.

You weren't around when Gingrich and Kaisch using tax rate cuts and spending restraint and welfare reform, all of which Clinton opposed but finally had to give in, balanced the budget and produced surpluses? You weren't around when Bush43 with a Rep Congress produce budgets heading back to surplus after the 2001 recession with tax rate cuts getting the deficit down to a paltry $161B FY2007. Maybe you then missed the Democrats taking back the Congress and two years later the deficit hitting $1,400B even with their tax rate increases and keeping it over $1,000B for the next four? Perhaps you missed the Republicans starting to take back the Congress and passing austerity and sequester cutting that deficit in half?

And you think now the Democrats are heading us towards a surplus?

 

[LouC]

Decent British cheese if the US has any taste.

By all means!

Join Wallace and Gromit at CheeseFest UK!

Love cheese as much as Wallace does? Then you don\'t want to miss the chance to visit CheeseFest, a touring event coming to towns and cities

wallaceandgromit.com

 

[rahl]

You weren't around when Gingrich and Kaisch using tax rate cuts and spending restraint and welfare reform, all of which Clinton opposed but finally had to give in, balanced the budget and produced surpluses? You weren't around when Bush43 with a Rep Congress produce budgets heading back to surplus after the 2001 recession with tax rate cuts getting the deficit down to a paltry $161B FY2007. Maybe you then missed the Democrats taking back the Congress and two years later the deficit hitting $1,400B even with their tax rate increases and keeping it over $1,000B for the next four? Perhaps you missed the Republicans starting to take back the Congress and passing austerity and sequester cutting that deficit in half?

And you think now the Democrats are heading us towards a surplus?

Still don't know how bills become law I see, lol. Still repeating long ago refuted arguments from this and the other forum I see, lol.