• 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!

Surprise! Huge US Budget Surplus Shatters Record

winston53660 said:
One more time:



The relevant links are there.
Click to expand...

Look, you can make that claim over and over again but until you understand the budget process as I laid it out for you, all you do is make a fool out of yourself. Intergovt. holdings is part of the budget which you want to ignore. Taking money from intergovt holdings and using it to balance the budget or show a surplus isn't a surplus at all. Now tell me again why this is an issue today with the Obama 6.2 trillion dollar debt?
 
Conservative said:
What you want to ignore again as usual are the two parts of the budget, Public and intergovt. holding. I suggest you learn both sides and when you take money from intergovt holdings(SS/Medicare} that money is targeted for the future and thus is an expense that is due in the future. Taking that money now and replacing it with an IOU doesn't create a surplus.
Click to expand...


Beyond you being intentionally or not being oblivious about this:

The principal difference is that under accrual accounting the government would book immediately the costs of promises made to pay future benefits to government workers and Social Security and Medicare beneficiaries.
FactCheck.org : The Budget and Deficit Under Clinton
Click to expand...

Why didn't you vote for "lock box" Gore if this is such a concern for you?
 
Conservative said:
Look, you can make that claim over and over again but until you understand the budget process as I laid it out for you, all you do is make a fool out of yourself. Intergovt. holdings is part of the budget which you want to ignore. Taking money from intergovt holdings and using it to balance the budget or show a surplus isn't a surplus at all. Now tell me again why this is an issue today with the Obama 6.2 trillion dollar debt?
Click to expand...


Problem is I'm not ignoring intergov. holdings and the obligations.
 
winston53660 said:
Beyond you being intentionally or not being oblivious about this:



Why didn't you vote for "lock box" Gore if this is such a concern for you?
Click to expand...

Do you know what an accrued expense is? The expenses were accrued, the money used, and replaced with an IOU
 
Morrigi said:
On that note, here are a few quotes.

"...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Guess who? No, none of the Founding Fathers. Not Orwell.

"Fascism is capitalism in decay."
- Vladimir Lenin
Is our state not slowly decaying before our eyes?

“If tyranny and oppression come to this land it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.”
- James Madison
Well damn, that sounds familiar

“When one with honeyed words but evil mind
Persuades the mob, great woes befall the state.”
- Euripides, Orestes
Older than dirt, still true.

“The means of defence against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.”
- James Madison

On the subject of tyranny, the world is well-experienced in its rise to power, its fall, and its intricacies. We would do well to learn from history, lest we be doomed to repeat it.
Click to expand...
Nearly all of human history we are aware of involves tyranny. Our experiment in self rule is nearly at an end. Imagine me agreeing with something that PowerRob agrees with. Perhaps he misread it.
 
poweRob said:
Looks like good news. I can't wait for all the deficit hawks to come in here and also crow about how great this is for our economy. You guys will right? Or is the sky still falling?

Surprise! Huge US Budget Surplus Shatters Record

The U.S. government posted a budget surplus in June, the latest sign of rapidly improving public finances that could reduce the urgency in Congress to strike a deal to raise the nation's limit on borrowing.

Rising tax revenues, public spending cuts and big payments to the Treasury from state-backed mortgage firms helped the government take in $117 billion more last month than it paid out, the U.S. Treasury said on Thursday.

Analysts polled by Reuters had expected a smaller surplus of $39.5 billion.

June's surplus was the largest for that month on record.​
Click to expand...
"I likes when the guvermunt spends muny.... DUUUUHHH!!!"

imagesCAFCS180.jpg
 
Conservative said:
Yes, and it is the President's economic and foreign policy agenda that is voted on by the Congress. You seem to confuse appropriations with leadership and the responsibilities of leadership
Click to expand...

There are no responsibilities of leadership. The founders never instead the President to be the leader of the country. The President is not supposed to have an economic agenda. Hes a single point decision make for military and foreign policy. Read the constitution. THe congresses powers are many, the President powers are few.
 
Conservative said:
Do you know what an accrued expense is? The expenses were accrued, the money used, and replaced with an IOU
Click to expand...

I going to try that with my checking account. I always have extra checks but no extra money at the end of each month, this may be the perfect solution! :)
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
I going to try that with my checking account. I always have extra checks but no extra money at the end of each month, this may be the perfect solution! :)
Click to expand...

Yes, welcome to the new liberal logic. An IOU is always cash in that liberal world.
 
jonny5 said:
There are no responsibilities of leadership. The founders never instead the President to be the leader of the country. The President is not supposed to have an economic agenda. Hes a single point decision make for military and foreign policy. Read the constitution. THe congresses powers are many, the President powers are few.
Click to expand...

Wow, what kind of response and logic is that? You really don't understand leadership at all. I posted a link here to a very good explanation of leadership, suggest you find it and read it. We do not have a true democracy, we have a representative democracy and with a representative democracy we elect leaders. The President is indeed the leader of the country and it is the President's agenda which is the starting point for debate and when the President's party is in charge of Congress that agenda becomes the Congressional agenda which is what you are seeing right now.
 
jonny5 said:
There are no responsibilities of leadership. The founders never instead the President to be the leader of the country. The President is not supposed to have an economic agenda. Hes a single point decision make for military and foreign policy. Read the constitution. THe congresses powers are many, the President powers are few.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, Article II, Section 3 gives the President substantial power. In part, it states, "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient..."

In short, the Constitution gives the President broad authority to "recommend" domestic policy initiatives, including but not limited to economic policy, to the Congress. That the President can suggest economic policy and can have an economic agenda is fully constitutional. That some ideas might run into constitutional barriers is entirely a different matter.
 
Conservative said:
It is times like these that we need leadership not an American Idol President. We got leadership during the 80's with Reagan but aren't getting that leadership now when we need it most. Obama would rather take vacations and play golf vs. doing his job of getting Democrats and Republicans together to do their jobs. Nothing is going to change as long as we have someone in the WH who doesn't understand leadership and is nothing more tha a community agitator.
Click to expand...
A real leader would no doubt raise money by selling arms to the Iranians.
 
Conservative said:
Wow, what kind of response and logic is that? You really don't understand leadership at all. I posted a link here to a very good explanation of leadership, suggest you find it and read it. We do not have a true democracy, we have a representative democracy and with a representative democracy we elect leaders. The President is indeed the leader of the country and it is the President's agenda which is the starting point for debate and when the President's party is in charge of Congress that agenda becomes the Congressional agenda which is what you are seeing right now.
Click to expand...

We have CONSTITUTIONAL republic, and the constitution lays out the responsibilities of the various branches. THe legislative branch makes policy, the President executes it. The reality now of having a celebrity president who acts like a king is exactly the problem that needs to be reversed.
 
donsutherland1 said:
On the contrary, Article II, Section 3 gives the President substantial power. In part, it states, "He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient..."

In short, the Constitution gives the President broad authority to "recommend" domestic policy initiatives, including but not limited to economic policy, to the Congress. That the President can suggest economic policy and can have an economic agenda is fully constitutional. That some ideas might run into constitutional barriers is entirely a different matter.
Click to expand...

Reccomending stuff is power how? Anyone can do that. YOU can do that. He cant actually do anything becuase the power to do stuff is with congress.
 
jonny5 said:
Reccomending stuff is power how? Anyone can do that. YOU can do that. He cant actually do anything becuase the power to do stuff is with congress.
Click to expand...

How is it then that every bad thing that happens is the fault of the president (according to his opponents), and every good thing that happens is also because of the president (according to his supporters)?
 
Dittohead not! said:
A real leader would no doubt raise money by selling arms to the Iranians.
Click to expand...

Aw, yes, more diversion. Is that the best you can do? Seems you and others cannot stay in the present and blame the economic conditions today all on the past with no responsibility going to the current President. How typical.
 
pbrauer said:
Has that ever happened?:2razz:
Click to expand...

I seem to remember reading about such a thing many years ago, something about hostages and a civil war in Nicaragua or somewhere like that, but that was a long, long time ago and has nothing to do with the present time.

When applying history to the present, legends are what count, not dry old dull facts and reality.
 
Conservative said:
Aw, yes, more diversion. Is that the best you can do? Seems you and others cannot stay in the present and blame the economic conditions today all on the past with no responsibility going to the current President. How typical.
Click to expand...

You started it.

actually, I agree that we have a lack of leadership, but when the name of the legendary demigod is mentioned, I just have this Pavlovian response that compels me to bring up the actual history of his presidency.
 
jonny5 said:
We have CONSTITUTIONAL republic, and the constitution lays out the responsibilities of the various branches. THe legislative branch makes policy, the President executes it. The reality now of having a celebrity president who acts like a king is exactly the problem that needs to be reversed.
Click to expand...

You really have no idea what you are talking about if you believe that the President of the United States doesn't dictate the legislative agenda to the Congress. you seem very naïve and gullible. We do have a celebrity President right now who acts like a king ruling by executive order.
 
Dittohead not! said:
I seem to remember reading about such a thing many years ago, something about hostages and a civil war in Nicaragua or somewhere like that, but that was a long, long time ago and has nothing to do with the present time.

When applying history to the present, legends are what count, not dry old dull facts and reality.
Click to expand...
I have nothing to Contra that.
 
Dittohead not! said:
You started it.

actually, I agree that we have a lack of leadership, but when the name of the legendary demigod is mentioned, I just have this Pavlovian response that compels me to bring up the actual history of his presidency.
Click to expand...

Tell me how the Iran Contra scandal affected you or the American economy? What does that have to with the economic conditions of today? Actual history shows that Iran Contra wasn't nearly as bad as Reagan haters want to claim
 
Conservative said:
Tell me how the Iran Contra scandal affected you or the American economy? What does that have to with the economic conditions of today? Actual history shows that Iran Contra wasn't nearly as bad as Reagan haters want to claim
Click to expand...

and, I'm sure the bailout of the S and L was totally different from the bailouts of the "too big to fail" entities during the Bush and Obama administrations as well.
 
Dittohead not! said:
and, I'm sure the bailout of the S and L was totally different from the bailouts of the "too big to fail" entities during the Bush and Obama administrations as well.
Click to expand...

Didn't support that either so what is your point? Time for some tough love but the problem is tough love never hurts the bureaucrats.
 
Conservative said:
Didn't support that either so what is your point? Time for some tough love but the problem is tough love never hurts the bureaucrats.
Click to expand...

I'm sure you didn't support the bailouts of the S and L, nor the arms sales to the Iranians. You probably weren't too happy about amnesty for illegals, either, and yet you bring Reagan up as a great example of leadership. That is quite puzzling.

But, back to the subject of the thread: It appears that the deficit is about half of what it was during the campaign. I can recall both candidates claiming to plan to reduce the deficit over ten years, but neither of them projecting anything like a halving of it this soon.

It seems pretty unlikely that Obama has done anything to bring about such a reduction, and yet the opposition seems to be intent on claiming that the economy can't possibly be improving with a Democrat still in the White House, while Obama supporters are equally intent on his claiming credit.

It's almost like beliefs and biases trump facts.

What's that? Oh, take out "almost" and insert "politics"? Right. Insert politics into anything, and facts really don't matter any more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom