Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

  1. #31
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    We need to cut the deficit and inspire confidence in the stability and good credit of the United States government, as the best means of growing the economy, and the only practical way to cut the deficit is the cut the spending. Cutting the spending by ummm...1.5 trillion dollars would do the trick nicely.
    That doesn't make sense. Cutting the deficit would reduce demand. Which would reduce taxes. Which would then reduce our capacity to pay down the massive debt as well as fund our $57+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities. Furthermore, cutting spending would stall if not stop the recovery resulting in more job losses and even less demand and revenue. You don't build stable credit on job losses and low tax revenue. But that's exactly what you are arguing for.

    Austerity measures like the ones Germany is calling for will ensure low if any growth. And if you're against higher taxes, there's no way we can reduce our deficit and debt which will then lead to poor credit ratings.

    Your argument does not gel with your goal.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  2. #32
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    Which, of course, will never happen. While I'm sure both sides can put a good face on saying we need to be fiscally responsible, both sides want to cut different things.
    And neither will cut what really matters.

    Without cuts and reform to military, medicare and Social Security we will never even come close to balancing the budget.

    The GOP knows it cannot touch Medicare. And it won't touch the military. Social Security may be possible, but only after the recession is over and job increases are in the six digits monthly. And that isn't looking likely for years. And Democrats won't touch SS or Medicare. And once Gates is gone, there's no way they'll be able to cut military spending.

    Effectively the biggest three items are effective untouchable.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    That doesn't make sense. Cutting the deficit would reduce demand.
    Not among those who want less deficit.

    If there was less deficit availaible, and people who wanted to buy deficit would find it more expensive, and the increased price of deficit would drive down demand, leading to an escalating effect that would reduce the demand for deficit to a newer, and lower equlibrium than can then be reduced by another forced deficit reduction.

    See how easy it is?

    Since the economy is driven by consumer demand, not money stolen or borrewed by the government, reducing the deficit will grow the economy.

    Money paid in interest is money wasted. The Obama deficits are so gigantic that soon have the national GDP will be consumed by paying the interest. And money wasted paying deficit interest is money not paying for "infrastructure", or, more importanly, not money the private citizen can use for his own private purposes.

    And earning money to spend for their own private purposes is the reason normal people work.

    Which would reduce taxes.
    No.

    Cutting spending reduces government outlays (by definition) which reduces the need for taxation (by definition).


    Cutting tax rates, on the other hand, puts more money in the hands of people actually producing things with that money, (unlike government), and leads them to increase their income, which, by the way, increases the revenues the government realizes.

    What is important is increasing government revenues, right? Hmmm?

    Taxation isn't supposed to be about punishing people with more money than you do, right? Hmmmm?

    So... top marginal income tax rates should be SLASHED.

    That capital gains tax? Shouldn't exist. Capital is invested and moved to create more capital, which is used to finance businesses and create jobs. This economy isn't going to grow in any significant way until taxes are cut.

    Massive spending isn't going to do it. The Messiah's first year and a half in office has proved this conclusively.

    Which would then reduce our capacity to pay down the massive debt as well as fund our $57+ Trillion in unfunded liabilities. Furthermore, cutting spending would stall if not stop the recovery resulting in more job losses and even less demand and revenue. You don't build stable credit on job losses and low tax revenue. But that's exactly what you are arguing for.
    No. You don't build a stable nation on job losses and punitive taxes. So the nation should stop wasting time and money on failed Keynesian policies that have never worked.

    And the unfunded liabilities is more like 100+ trillion. If the government doesn't get out of the way and allow the private sector to grow again, that hundred trillion dollar debt is going to become a quarter quadrillion dollar debt, and it's going to be paid by the government running it's magical money machines in the basement of the Treasury.

    Austerity measures like the ones Germany is calling for will ensure low if any growth. And if you're against higher taxes, there's no way we can reduce our deficit and debt which will then lead to poor credit ratings.

    Your argument does not gel with your goal.
    My goal is freedom.

    Government programs are slavery.

    My argument makes perfect economic sense and it's consistent with my goal.

  4. #34
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    So in that case Obama is not responsible for the current deficit, congress is.
    What's that? You blame the Dems?
    Good for you.

  5. #35
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: White House predicts record $1.47 trillion deficit

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Not among those who want less deficit.

    If there was less deficit availaible, and people who wanted to buy deficit would find it more expensive, and the increased price of deficit would drive down demand, leading to an escalating effect that would reduce the demand for deficit to a newer, and lower equlibrium than can then be reduced by another forced deficit reduction.
    That was complete and utter gibberish.

    See how easy it is?
    Perhaps you could formulate that into comprehensible English?

    Since the economy is driven by consumer demand, not money stolen or borrewed by the government, reducing the deficit will grow the economy.
    Except that no one is forcing anyone to buy US debt. Your premise is essentially that the government is stealing money to pay for spending. That is no where near reality. Reducing the deficit means cutting spending and increases taxes, both of which reduce activity in the economy.

    Money paid in interest is money wasted. The Obama deficits are so gigantic that soon have the national GDP will be consumed by paying the interest. And money wasted paying deficit interest is money not paying for "infrastructure", or, more importanly, not money the private citizen can use for his own private purposes.
    While that is true, it doesn't address either of what we wrote.

    No.

    Cutting spending reduces government outlays (by definition) which reduces the need for taxation (by definition).
    Except you ignore how the money is spent. And the demand that generates. And effectively all basic economic principles.

    Cutting tax rates, on the other hand, puts more money in the hands of people actually producing things with that money, (unlike government), and leads them to increase their income, which, by the way, increases the revenues the government realizes.
    Except that you once again are basing your premise that the government is forcibly taking money to spend it. Furthermore, your argument is one of opportunity cost and you assume that the money will be spent rather then sit it bank accounts doing nothing which we did see for months. Your argument is based on what you want to be true rather then what we see in reality.

    Massive spending isn't going to do it. The Messiah's first year and a half in office has proved this conclusively.
    Neither will cutting spending or lowering taxes. You, like so many people here, operate under the idea that all recessions are identical. Hence why so many of you appear foolish. Cutting taxes as Obama did, did not work because cutting taxes doesn't work against this type of recession. Hint: you may want to learn why this recession is different before posting again.

    No. You don't build a stable nation on job losses and punitive taxes. So the nation should stop wasting time and money on failed Keynesian policies that have never worked.
    Come back when you have reasonable beliefs on taxes.

    My goal is freedom.

    Government programs are slavery.

    My argument makes perfect economic sense and it's consistent with my goal.
    And one less reasonable person to talk to.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •