• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Unemployement Drops: Legitimate or Not?

This is what I see:
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....3477A02E303D5B52DC780C0BFEF8E8E73D07D9F7FE1E5

Code:
Table 3.2. Federal Government Current Receipts and Expenditures																																															
[Billions of dollars] Seasonally adjusted at annual rates																																															
Bureau of Economic Analysis																																															
Last Revised on: September 27, 2012 - Next Release Date October 26, 2012

Code:
Line	*	2001				2002				2003				2004				2005				2006				2007				2008				2009				2010				2011				2012	
		I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II	III	IV	I	II
1	    Current receipts	2101.9	2087	1894.9	1997.3	1860	1858.3	1855.9	1863.1	1886.3	1902.8	1827.4	1923.9	1944.4	1989	2044.2	2078.3	2230.7	2257.3	2305.4	2366.9	2473.8	2501.8	2547.4	2575.1	2642.8	2658.5	2651.5	2666.1	2640.1	2409.8	2501.4	2457.7	2218.7	2207.4	2206.5	2273.4	2326.6	2365.8	2427.2	2461.9	2509.8	2522.9	2511.3	2534.3	2664.9	2669.1
2	Current tax receipts	1326.3	1314.7	1126.2	1230.6	1078.4	1073.3	1067	1075.2	1084.7	1091.3	1009	1096	1098.4	1135	1178.5	1203.4	1336.9	1357	1392.9	1448	1517.6	1541.6	1581.3	1592.8	1637.2	1648.6	1632.6	1632	1586.2	1358.4	1450.2	1396.1	1162.3	1130.7	1154	1207.2	1252.3	1282	1333.9	1371.3	1494	1504.1	1494.2	1518.5	1629.2	1637
ETA
hmm it looks so much better in preview
trying again

Compare and contrast:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...nt-drops-legitimate-not-7.html#post1060992611

2001 2163.7
2002 2002.1
2003 2047.9
2004 2213.2
2005 2546.8
2006 2807.4
2007 2951.2
2008 2790.3​

It would be a lot easier if you changed the numbers to annual instead of quarterly
 
It would be a lot easier if you changed the numbers to annual instead of quarterly
Good call.
Thank you.

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....57850BCEA32A14E37D420D18DE74DC86D965243895AC8


Code:
**	2001
    Current receipts	2020.3
Current tax receipts	1249.4
	
	2002
    Current receipts	1859.3
Current tax receipts	1073.5
	
	2003
    Current receipts	1885.1
Current tax receipts	1070.2
	
	2004
    Current receipts	2013.9
Current tax receipts	1153.8
	
	2005
    Current receipts	2290.1
Current tax receipts	1383.7
	
	2006
    Current receipts	2524.5
Current tax receipts	1558.3
	
	2007
    Current receipts	2654.7
Current tax receipts	1637.6
	
	2008
    Current receipts	2502.2
Current tax receipts	1447.7
	
	2009
    Current receipts	2226.5
Current tax receipts	1163.6
	
	2010
    Current receipts	2395.4
Current tax receipts	1309.8
	
	2011
    Current receipts	2519.6
Current tax receipts	1502.7

Compare and contrast:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...nt-drops-legitimate-not-7.html#post1060992611

2001 2163.7
2002 2002.1
2003 2047.9
2004 2213.2
2005 2546.8
2006 2807.4
2007 2951.2
2008 2790.3


fwiw these numbers from the BEA seem to agree with the biased WH etc
 
Last edited:
Pardon me for not believing much that you post because what you believe hasn't come true. Not sure how anyone can look at the results and claim progress has been made other than those who don't believe in a free enterprise capitalistic economy. It really is hard dealing with people like you who ignore actual data and still buy the liberal talking points. The economy isn't generating the jobs or economic growth to keep up with population growth but you still want to hang on to an ideology that is a failure.

With all do respect to you our differences are great. You are a C and I am a L. So, we will see what happens on Nov 6. It has been good debating with you. May the best man win!!
 
Good call.
Thank you.

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....57850BCEA32A14E37D420D18DE74DC86D965243895AC8


Code:
**	2001
    Current receipts	2020.3
Current tax receipts	1249.4
	
	2002
    Current receipts	1859.3
Current tax receipts	1073.5
	
	2003
    Current receipts	1885.1
Current tax receipts	1070.2
	
	2004
    Current receipts	2013.9
Current tax receipts	1153.8
	
	2005
    Current receipts	2290.1
Current tax receipts	1383.7
	
	2006
    Current receipts	2524.5
Current tax receipts	1558.3
	
	2007
    Current receipts	2654.7
Current tax receipts	1637.6
	
	2008
    Current receipts	2502.2
Current tax receipts	1447.7
	
	2009
    Current receipts	2226.5
Current tax receipts	1163.6
	
	2010
    Current receipts	2395.4
Current tax receipts	1309.8
	
	2011
    Current receipts	2519.6
Current tax receipts	1502.7

Compare and contrast:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...nt-drops-legitimate-not-7.html#post1060992611

2001 2163.7
2002 2002.1
2003 2047.9
2004 2213.2
2005 2546.8
2006 2807.4
2007 2951.2
2008 2790.3


fwiw these numbers from the BEA seem to agree with the biased WH etc

No question about it, one of us is wrong, because here is the data from the site but regardless what both charts show govt. revenue grew after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented in July 2003 and that flies in the face of liberal rhetoric.

Table 3.1. Government Current Receipts and Expenditures
[Billions of dollars]
Last Revised on: September 27, 2012 - Next Release Date October 26, 2012
Line 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
1 Current receipts 3,132.40 3,118.20 2,967.90 3,043.40 3,265.70 3,659.30 3,995.20 4,197.00 4,051.60
2 Current tax receipts 2,202.80 2,163.70 2,002.10 2,047.90 2,213.20 2,546.80 2,807.40 2,951.20 2,774.10
 
It means the unemployment rate dropped 3 tenths of a percent. Hardly a big jump. I get a kick out of republicans spinning this as fixing the numbers!

So you really think the 7.8 is a good indicator for the economy getting better?

Do you realize what accounted for that "drop" in the unemployment number?? It meant that MORE PEOPLE stopped looking for work than ever before. The 'jobs created' were only a third of the amount needed to keep up with population growth - which would ordinarily cause the unemployment rate to INCREASE at least a tenth of a point - more like two tenths of a point.

BUT, Obama has created conditions where people just stopped looking for work. MORE PEOPLE stopped looking for work. Therefore there were 'less unemployed' by virtue of the fact that so many people just quit.

SO - Obama got his 'number' to fuel his lying propaganda campaign, but the country continues to go into the dumpster. Just think - we can reach ZERO unemployment when NOBODY tries to work - they will just live off the government teat. amirite?

Celebrate a false hope while you can - the election is only a month away - then Obama won't have to cook the books anymore - he can just govern as he wants with no regard to even pleasing his sycophants. elections have consequences. Electing Obama will be bad mojo.
 
With all do respect to you our differences are great. You are a C and I am a L. So, we will see what happens on Nov 6. It has been good debating with you. May the best man win!!

I wish you well, not good luck with Obama but in your personal life. This country cannot afford four more years of Obama and I find it interesting that someone who has a son that has been out of work for as long as yours would support four more years of the Obama economic policies that have been failures.

If your son really is worthy of a job it isn't going to be the kind of job the Obama economy is creating. We need a free market capitalistic economy that grows better quality and paying jobs. Most of the jobs created are under employment jobs and that should show you the falacy of the unemployment rate drop.
 
simon-w-moon-albums-pics-picture67135768-fedtaxrev92-11.jpg


from this data

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....E4EE918A91B838CE13B0B0F45A83E50B6B676D8A3DBAC
 
No question about it, one of us is wrong, because here is the data from the site but regardless what both charts show govt. revenue grew after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented in July 2003 and that flies in the face of liberal rhetoric.

Table 3.1. Government Current Receipts and Expenditures
[Billions of dollars]
Last Revised on: September 27, 2012 - Next Release Date October 26, 2012
Line 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
1 Current receipts 3,132.40 3,118.20 2,967.90 3,043.40 3,265.70 3,659.30 3,995.20 4,197.00 4,051.60
2 Current tax receipts 2,202.80 2,163.70 2,002.10 2,047.90 2,213.20 2,546.80 2,807.40 2,951.20 2,774.10
These don't match your original numbers either.

What did you have to put in to get these?

From what I can tell it's natural for growth to be occurring.
I suspect some growth may be a function of population. idk.
 
These don't match your original numbers either.

What did you have to put in to get these?

From what I can tell it's natural for growth to be occurring.
I suspect some growth may be a function of population. idk.

Population growth doesn't create tax revenue, jobs do and jobs were growing from 2003 to 2008

And what I was focused on was tax revenue since liberals believe that tax cuts caused the deficit which would mean less tax revenue. the tax revenue posted matches the chart I posted. My point remains, tax revenue increased after the tax cuts were fully implemented which flies in the face of liberal rhetoric.
 
Guess what? I don't really cares what happens in Canada.....

Now why isn't that surprising. Seems you can bitch a lot about stereotypes, but when it comes to eliminating them you really don't care.
If all you can do is complain, maybe you shouldn't.

I'm from Chicago....

Okay so you won a cup two years ago. don't let it go to your head.

You get credit for the idiot thing - however, research Chicago.

Why should I, its full of welfare queens.

Well it only shows how basic college is - that is why I burned my degree..... Means nothing to me - does nothing for me. What good is a degree that anyone can get? - even a person with the IQ of 80? - but I suppose everyone these days gets a "Red Ribbon" (in your country)...... Every kid gets a blue ribbon here..

Yes, what good is a generic degree like a bachelor of arts? Only red ribbons award in canada are for beavertail eating and moose calling contests.

You the oppressor, you enjoy it dude?

You mispelled it. Its Yu the Oppressor, and yes I did enjoy it, the fighting scenes were excellent and the sex scenes even better.
You can enjoy YU to. simply send a SASE with $5 and a dvd will be in the mail the very next millenium.
 
Confirms that tax revenue went up after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented, doesn't it?

simon-w-moon-albums-pics-picture67135770-fedtaxrevtrends1929-2011.jpg

source: http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....8339970AC04A6FEE32E832CA008CBE09A1D319513BDD1

Confirms that tax revenue has an upward trend that seems as if it could be independent of who is president, doesn't it.

Some of tax revenue could be a function of the size of the populace. Just guessing on that.
What do you think?
Could the population of the country play a part in how much tax revenue there is?

Is it even remotely possible that the tax revenue would have trended even if the tax cuts had not been made?
 
Confirms that tax revenue went up after the Bush tax cuts were fully implemented, doesn't it?

do you know the split between personal and corporate taxes for this top line number?
 
Population growth doesn't create tax revenue, jobs do and jobs were growing from 2003 to 2008
Oh.
I thought if more people were paying taxes it would work out to more taxes being paid.

So, what is it that happens to total tax revenues when more people pay taxes?
 
simon-w-moon-albums-pics-picture67135770-fedtaxrevtrends1929-2011.jpg

source: http://www.bea.gov/iTable/download....8339970AC04A6FEE32E832CA008CBE09A1D319513BDD1

Confirms that tax revenue has an upward trend that seems as if it could be independent of who is president, doesn't it.

Some of tax revenue could be a function of the size of the populace. Just guessing on that.
What do you think?
Could the population of the country play a part in how much tax revenue there is?

Is it even remotely possible that the tax revenue would have trended even if the tax cuts had not been made?

Depends, what do you do when you get more take home pay in your paycheck because of tax cuts? Human behavior seems to be ignored. What most liberals ignore is that Reagan cut taxes, Clinton signed the Tax relief act of 1997, Bush cut taxes and tax revenue went up

Not sure why anyone has a problem keeping more of what they earn, please explain it to me?
 
Oh.
I thought if more people were paying taxes it would work out to more taxes being paid.

So, what is it that happens to total tax revenues when more people pay taxes?

Population growth means more deductions and less taxes, more jobs is what creates more taxpayers thus more govt. revenue
 
do you know the split between personal and corporate taxes for this top line number?

Does it matter? I don't have the actual breakdown but know that income tax and corporate taxes both went up AFTER the Bush tax cuts, AFTER the Reagan tax cuts which is what is going to happen in a consumer driven economy.
 
Depends, what do you do when you get more take home pay in your paycheck because of tax cuts?
Well, I am asking about historical data here. Idk what all of the hundreds of millions of Americans did with their money.

I see that the tax revenue goes up as the population goes up. Naively, I assumed that having more people paying taxes would increase the amount of taxes collected. You have assured me that more people paying taxes does not increase tax revenue. I find that puzzling and hope for an explanation.

Human behavior seems to be ignored.
Yeah. I am pretty much focused on the revenue data we have been discussing.
Not all that interested in armchair psychology at the moment.

What most liberals ignore is that Reagan cut taxes, Clinton signed the Tax relief act of 1997, Bush cut taxes and tax revenue went up.
It seems that revenue generally trends upward whether there are tax cuts or tax increases. Not sure that the tax revenue data make that strong of a case for causation. That's just my observation of the data as a lay person. I have no specialized training or experience with this sort of data.

Is there some reason to think that tax revenue would not have continued on its historical upward trend if the tax cuts had not been passed?

Not sure why anyone has a problem keeping more of what they earn, please explain it to me?
I'll imagine up some explanation to pull out of the thin air in my ass after you explain about why I would know the answer to that question.


How did you come by the second set of numbers you present as the tax revenue?
 
Population growth means more deductions and less taxes, more jobs is what creates more taxpayers thus more govt. revenue
So as the population of the country increase tax revenue decreases?

That doesn't seem to be borne out by the data available. It seems that as the US population grew tax revenues also increased.

:shrug:
 
Does it matter? I don't have the actual breakdown but know that income tax and corporate taxes both went up AFTER the Bush tax cuts, AFTER the Reagan tax cuts which is what is going to happen in a consumer driven economy.

Its just a point of interest to see if there is a correlation between lowered personal tax income and higher corporate tax income, is all.
 
Simon W. Moon;1060993480]Well, I am asking about historical data here. Idk what all of the hundreds of millions of Americans did with their money.

I see that the tax revenue goes up as the population goes up. Naively, I assumed that having more people paying taxes would increase the amount of taxes collected. You have assured me that more people paying taxes does not increase tax revenue. I find that puzzling and hope for an explanation.

It does seem that you have a reading comprehension problem and don't know the difference between population growth and job growth. Population growth means more deductions from taxes, job growth means more taxpayers. let me know if that still isn't clear. Apparently we didn't have any population growth when tax revenue dropped in your example.

Yeah. I am pretty much focused on the revenue data we have been discussing.
Not all that interested in armchair psychology at the moment.

If you are truly interested in revenue data then you obviously see that revenue went up AFTER the tax cuts so how can that be? Obama supporters seem to have a problem with that reality

It seems that revenue generally trends upward whether there are tax cuts or tax increases. Not sure that the tax revenue data make that strong of a case for causation. That's just my observation of the data as a lay person. I have no specialized training or experience with this sort of data.

Seems like you are getting into the weeds and ignoring the basic arguments of liberals and that is that tax revenue dropped after tax cuts. Obviously the numbers don't show that. Further I am waiting for someone to explain to me how with 1.3 percent GDP growth that raising taxes puts 22.7 million Americans back to work full time?

Is there some reason to think that tax revenue would not have continued on its historical upward trend if the tax cuts had not been passed?

When you figure out the four components of GDP you will get your answer. Human behavior drives economic activity and tax revenue

I'll imagine up some explanation to pull out of the thin air in my ass after you explain about why I would know the answer to that question.

I look forward to anyone here pulling something out of their to explain that one

How did you come by the second set of numbers you present as the tax revenue?

The first set of numbers includes SS and Medicare which LBJ in his wisdom put on budget
 
Its just a point of interest to see if there is a correlation between lowered personal tax income and higher corporate tax income, is all.

People with more spendable income help increase corporate profits and create more employment thus more taxpayers.
 
Back
Top Bottom