Where is Trump's Balanced Budget?

[Conservative]

https://www.ssa.gov/history/BudgetTreatment.html

Technically, which is all that matters, SS is off budget and has been since 1986. So tell us what that means if SS has been "off budget" for the past 32 years but not treated as 'off budget?'

Seems to me it's a big nothing.

As I recall SS has been in existence long before 1986 and when On budget the funds were used for the Vietnam War, Great Society programs creating long term debt which now totals over 5.7 trillion dollars. Seems to me that big nothing ignores history and the misuse of SS and Medicare funds by the Presidents and Congress. We have a long term liability problem that has nothing to do with contributions but rather with the misuse of the funds

 

[Conservative]

You're making a semantic point, but LBJ only had "SS" money for his very last budget. Before that SS was off budget. What that means in practical terms is how we present SS in a "budget" document has little to do with anything. We fought Vietnam prior to 1968 with SS off budget, and how we financed the war didn't change in 1968 when SS went on budget. When SS was 'off budget' during the Iraq/Afghanistan wars (Bush II years), we paid for it like we did prior to 1968 when SS was also off budget.

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

5.7+ TRILLION in debt came from where?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

5.7+ TRILLION in debt came from where?

Probably from creative math and ignoring of facts.

For nearly three decades, the system took in far more revenue than it paid out in benefits; the surplus was invested in special non-tradeable Treasury bonds, with interest credited to the system’s two trust funds (one for old-age and survivors’ benefits, the other for disability payments). As of July 31, those trust funds together held $2.83 trillion in Treasuries. (Some people characterize that as the government “borrowing from” or “raiding” Social Security, but the system is in essentially the same position as any other investor who buys Treasuries.)

 

[JasperL]

As I recall SS has been in existence long before 1986 and when On budget the funds were used for the Vietnam War, Great Society programs creating long term debt which now totals over 5.7 trillion dollars. Seems to me that big nothing ignores history and the misuse of SS and Medicare funds by the Presidents and Congress. We have a long term liability problem that has nothing to do with contributions but rather with the misuse of the funds

On budget or off doesn't make a lick of difference in how we spend money. It's been "off budget" since Reagan, but we still for all purposes that I can see use the surplus as if it's "on" budget, and it's because if we collect $100 billion in surplus SS taxes, that's $100 billion less in Treasuries we have to sell to finance the deficit. And just because the surplus is technically "off budget" doesn't prevent really EVERYONE from lumping in SS surpluses in with "on budget" deficits when they talk about "the deficit" overall. It's semantics, and it's not even that because our public discourse completely ignores the "off budget" nature of SS RIGHT NOW.

What you're whining about is how the numbers are presented in various columns. I can go to https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/ and see the 'on budget' and 'off budget' columns, but no one cares and it doesn't affect how government works.

 

[Conservative]

Probably from creative math and ignoring of facts.

Or it could have something to do with you not understanding what an IOU is. Suggest you call the treasury Department and let them know we're paying too much debt service pn the debt in Social Security and it doesn't exist

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Dittohead not!]

Or it could have something to do with you not understanding what an IOU is. Suggest you call the treasury Department and let them know we're paying too much debt service pn the debt in Social Security and it doesn't exist

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Part of that debt is in the form of treasury bills, some of which are owned by the SS administration. Are you suggesting that the federal government shouldn't pay its debts?

 

[Conservative]

On budget or off doesn't make a lick of difference in how we spend money. It's been "off budget" since Reagan, but we still for all purposes that I can see use the surplus as if it's "on" budget, and it's because if we collect $100 billion in surplus SS taxes, that's $100 billion less in Treasuries we have to sell to finance the deficit. And just because the surplus is technically "off budget" doesn't prevent really EVERYONE from lumping in SS surpluses in with "on budget" deficits when they talk about "the deficit" overall. It's semantics, and it's not even that because our public discourse completely ignores the "off budget" nature of SS RIGHT NOW.

What you're whining about is how the numbers are presented in various columns. I can go to https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/ and see the 'on budget' and 'off budget' columns, but no one cares and it doesn't affect how government works.

Look I posted treasury data now obviously you think that that is wrong so why don't you do the the thread a public service and call them and tell them that we are paying too much debt service and that the 5.7 trillion dollars Social Security Medicare debt doesn't exist

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative]

Part of that debt is in the form of treasury bills, some of which are owned by the SS administration. Are you suggesting that the federal government shouldn't pay its debts?

Part of the debt? Do you understand what the word debt means? Treasury bills are an obligation the Tsar part of the total 21 trillion dollar debt we have today keep ignoring that and keep showing the problems with the education system in this country today

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[JasperL]

Look I posted treasury data now obviously you think that that is wrong so why don't you do the the thread a public service and call them and tell them that we are paying too much debt service and that the 5.7 trillion dollars Social Security Medicare debt doesn't exist

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Of course, you ignored my point and erected new goal posts. My fault for expecting anything different. eace

 

[Conservative]

Of course, you ignored my point and erected new goal posts. My fault for expecting anything different. eace

Your problem continues to be an inability to admit when wrong, how can their be an IOU in Inter Government holdings with no SS/Medicare debt? The goal posts are only moved in the mind of someone who said that there was no SS/Medicare debt.

 

[Conservative]

On budget or off doesn't make a lick of difference in how we spend money. It's been "off budget" since Reagan, but we still for all purposes that I can see use the surplus as if it's "on" budget, and it's because if we collect $100 billion in surplus SS taxes, that's $100 billion less in Treasuries we have to sell to finance the deficit. And just because the surplus is technically "off budget" doesn't prevent really EVERYONE from lumping in SS surpluses in with "on budget" deficits when they talk about "the deficit" overall. It's semantics, and it's not even that because our public discourse completely ignores the "off budget" nature of SS RIGHT NOW.

What you're whining about is how the numbers are presented in various columns. I can go to https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/historical-tables/ and see the 'on budget' and 'off budget' columns, but no one cares and it doesn't affect how government works.

Your problem continues to lack of understanding what a T-Bill and an IOU are with regards to SS and Medicare. Borrowing from the fund means a long term liability for the account and is why we have a 5.7 TRILLION dollar debt on the Treasury books. How does a pay as you go system, your words, create a deficit and debt?

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Your problem continues to lack of understanding what a T-Bill and an IOU are with regards to SS and Medicare. Borrowing from the fund means a long term liability for the account and is why we have a 5.7 TRILLION dollar debt on the Treasury books. How does a pay as you go system, your words, create a deficit and debt?

Seriously, Con, this is not a subject that you want to call other people out on. You couldn't answer the simplest of questions when I asked them.

 

[Conservative]

Seriously, Con, this is not a subject that you want to call other people out on. You couldn't answer the simplest of questions when I asked them.

Couldn't? LOL, your so called questions always divert from reality and the thread topic. Want to explain to us all why a pay as you go system has IOU's that posters here say isn't debt? Trump's balanced budget attempt comes from the 2019 budget as a start showing actual budget cuts, that along with strong economic growth thanks to the private sector continue to make the left look foolish

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Couldn't? LOL, your so called questions always divert from reality and the thread topic. Want to explain to us all why a pay as you go system has IOU's that posters here say isn't debt?

It's because the debt is internal. It's like your left pocket owing your right pocket money.

Trump's balanced budget attempt comes from the 2019 budget as a start showing actual budget cuts, that along with strong economic growth thanks to the private sector continue to make the left look foolish

A balanced federal budget is a moronic policy to chase, for reasons that you have already demonstrated are completely beyond your ken.

 

[grainbelt]

Because the economy is amazing according to trumpco. Why would we be deficit spending in an amazing economy with "fiscal conservatives" in charge. Hold your team accountable.

 

[Media_Truth]

Because the economy is amazing according to trumpco. Why would we be deficit spending in an amazing economy with "fiscal conservatives" in charge. Hold your team accountable.

Great point! They are not "fiscal conservatives". They are "fiscal thieves" - robbig from the poor, and giving to the rich.

 

[Conservative]

Great point! They are not "fiscal conservatives". They are "fiscal thieves" - robbig from the poor, and giving to the rich.

Yep allowing people to keep more of WHAT THEY EARN is robbery, really? Where did you get that belief? Feel sorry for people like you so full of anger, hate, and jealousy of what others have believing that what they have belongs to you. Only in the liberal world are the rich keeping more of what they earn called theft from the poor

 

[Conservative]

It's because the debt is internal. It's like your left pocket owing your right pocket money.




A balanced federal budget is a moronic policy to chase, for reasons that you have already demonstrated are completely beyond your ken.

What isn't changing is your inability to admit you are wrong on any subject as you continue to promote the nanny state, big govt. spending programs in a country whose economy is built on the private sector. The concept of keeping more of what you earn thus needing less govt. help is a foreign concept to you as is the reality that we have 50 independent states with individual budgets and responsibilities outside those of the Federal govt.

It does seem you cannot grasp the concept as to the true role of the Federal Govt. which is to provide for the common defense, not PROVIDE domestic welfare and take care of your personal responsibility needs.

Your belief that federal spending is the same a private sector spending is right out of that European socialist playbook. Incentive is also a foreign concept to you as is how this country generated a 20+ trillion dollar economy. Individual wealth creation, state and local responsibilities, small central govt. doesn't resonate in that liberal world in which you live.

 

[Conservative]

Great point! They are not "fiscal conservatives". They are "fiscal thieves" - robbig from the poor, and giving to the rich.

So you prefer robbing the rich to give to the poor, the rich who currently pay 40% of the income taxes collected in this country and amount to 1.4 million taxpayers? Still waiting for you to explain how you give a FIT cut to people who don't pay federal income taxes?

https://taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2016-update/

Now run like you always do from the official data

 

[Dittohead not!]

Part of the debt? Do you understand what the word debt means? Treasury bills are an obligation the Tsar part of the total 21 trillion dollar debt we have today keep ignoring that and keep showing the problems with the education system in this country today

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

Did your voice recognition app fail you, or was that post supposed to be an example of how the education system failed you?

The Tsar part? What???

 

[Dittohead not!]

Yep allowing people to keep more of WHAT THEY EARN is robbery, really? Where did you get that belief? Feel sorry for people like you so full of anger, hate, and jealousy of what others have believing that what they have belongs to you. Only in the liberal world are the rich keeping more of what they earn called theft from the poor

What is it called when the so called "conservatives" take less from the rich, then spend more, and add to the debt you keep mentioning? Is that liberal?

Is Trump a liberal? He's certainly not a fiscal conservative.

 

[Conservative]

Did your voice recognition app fail you, or was that post supposed to be an example of how the education system failed you?

The Tsar part? What???

Yes, voice texting sometimes makes up its own words, my point was money has been borrowed from the SS and Medicare Trust fund secured by T-Bills which are an obligation thus part of the debt. T-Bills have to be funded with cash and since we continue to run deficits that money is either printed, borrowed, or raised through higher taxes even though there is no guarantee that Congress will ever use any increased taxes to lower the debt

 

[Conservative]

What is it called when the so called "conservatives" take less from the rich, then spend more, and add to the debt you keep mentioning? Is that liberal?

Is Trump a liberal? He's certainly not a fiscal conservative.

Taking less from the rich, you mean allowing people to keep more of what they earn? Still waiting for you to post the line items of the budget that created that 2018 deficit and show that it was Trump spending and not inherited requirements?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Yes, voice texting sometimes makes up its own words, my point was money has been borrowed from the SS and Medicare Trust fund secured by T-Bills which are an obligation thus part of the debt. T-Bills have to be funded with cash and since we continue to run deficits that money is either printed, borrowed, or raised through higher taxes even though there is no guarantee that Congress will ever use any increased taxes to lower the debt

OK, now you're making some sense. Yes, that's a pretty good description of what has happened.

And from that, do we conclude that the deficit is inevitable? It was at least coming down before Trump and his minions took over, and now it's back in the trillion plus range once again. Despite that, Trump is seen as a "conservative," as opposed to the "liberal" Democrats. All of them are big government statists through and through.

As for a practical solution to the big government problem, do we simply end SS and Medicare? If so, does the payroll tax end as well?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Taking less from the rich, you mean allowing people to keep more of what they earn? Still waiting for you to post the line items of the budget that created that 2018 deficit and show that it was Trump spending and not inherited requirements?

Trump may not know, but surely his advisers know, what obligations the government has. "Allowing the rich to keep more of what they earn" sounds like a great slogan, but when the money has already been obligated, doing so increases the deficit.

Cutting taxes sounds great, is popular, but first the spending has to be addressed. That's just not so easy or popular.