• 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!

National debt hits new milestone, topping $22 trillion

TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

National debt hits new milestone, topping $22 trillion
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The national debt has passed a new milestone, topping $22 trillion for the first time.

The Treasury Department’s daily statement showed Tuesday that total outstanding public debt stands at $22.01 trillion. It stood at $19.95 trillion when President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2017.

The debt figure has been accelerating since the passage of Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax cut in December 2017 and action by Congress last year to increase spending on domestic and military programs.

The national debt is the total of the annual budget deficits. The Congressional Budget Office projects that this year’s deficit will be $897 billion — a 15.1 percent increase over last year’s imbalance of $779 billion. In the coming years, the CBO forecasts that the deficit will keep rising, top $1 trillion annually beginning in 2022 and never drop below $1 trillion through 2029. Much of the increase will come from mounting costs to fund Social Security and Medicare as the vast generation of baby boomers continue to retire.

The Trump administration contends that its tax cuts will eventually pay for themselves by generating faster economic growth. That projection is disputed by many economists.

COMMENT:-

When Mr. Trump's tax cuts finally cut in, Mr. Trump will be able to claim that He was responsible for lowering America's national debt from the highest point that it had ever been.

PS - Enjoy your "new and improved" tax refund.
​
Click to expand...

The national debt hit a new milestone or a record high under every president since Calvin Coolidge. In fact the national debt dropped from 25 billion down to 22 billion under Harding, then Coolidge dropped it from 22 billion down to 17 billion. Eisenhower was the last president where the national debt declined for two of his eight years. In the FY 1956 the national debt dropped from 274 billion down to 272 billion. Then in FY 1957 it fell from 272 billion down to 270 billion. Even so, IKE entered office with a national debt of 266 billion and left office with the debt at 288 billion.

Each president since Coolidge has set a record for debt during their presidency. It's a sad state of affairs when this becomes expected and routine. I'm of a mind each president, each congress should be trying to reduce the debt, not add to it. Sure, we've had presidents who talked about, political parties who harped on it, but done nothing. I don't expect any president or congress to take the debt serious anymore. It is nothing more than a useful political talking point from the party out of power. We'll do nothing until it's too late. Only after this nation has fallen into that financial abyss that will make the great depression look like a walk in the park will anyone even think about taking the national debt seriously.

Then the government probably will just print more money.
 
Exactice said:
Capitalism market is greed. But the fact is when money is made and made at larger dollars it still has to be spent in a couple of ways.

1) Amazon grew out of a Garage, Now Bezos is the RICHES man in the world, that purchases tangible physical items from someone, Has multiple warehouses and tech systems. Finally employs and pays millions of peoples wages and salaries
2) Walmart, GM, Apple, Microsoft. These multi BILLION dollar conglomerate makes BILLIONS but also invest that back into the economy by ways of physical property and Employees. I dont understand why people dont see the benefit of MORE jobs when a small business expends and makes MONEY. While GREED could and would poison the top eventually that is where stock holders and those that invest need to look in the mirror and say DID I get greedy as well
3) Bill Gates was the one trying to explain about AOC that is not feesabile because his NET worth of almost 100Billion is ALSO digital stock transfers, HE could lose 25% overnight..... So his valuation is NOT a real an fair ACTUAL valuation.

I totally get our "Debt" as a growing debt. The fact that I see though is that we have and WASTED so much tax dollars..... period.... Wishing that some type of efficiency could be actually implemented.

Finally I urge you to look into the natural disaster and the added debt, Money cant be printed we have to get it from somewhere? 140 BILLION in 6 months for Puerto Rico, Harvey and Irma......
Click to expand...

I agree with you that greed drives capitalism. The concentration of unimaginable wealth into very few people seems meaningless, especially considering the poverty we have right here in America, and the stagnation of wage growth in the middle class. But, how to fix this? Is it even broken? I think the real problem is the influence of wealth on the legislative process—that’s what creates the problems, not capitalism itself.

Concerning the debt. My view (a libertarian view) is to reduce the size of the federal government—get it to minimal levels to do the job described in the Constitution. A tiny government will cost much less, and the debt will get smaller.
 
Bullseye said:
That's total bull****. They matter all the time. Which trillion dollars of spending would you like to cut to stop the deficit? maybe take away granny's Medicare and Social Security? Send home all the none essential government employees? Your call.
Click to expand...

I'm not for austerity so there goes that attempted angle of yours. If I were to cut, I'd start with an audit of the DoD to see where to start. Then actually listen to the active military forces in what equipment they don't need anymore rather than having congress forcefeed the military equipment they don't need nor want but because it's built in their district... they have to take it.
 
poweRob said:
I'm not for austerity so there goes that attempted angle of yours.
Click to expand...
Where did I say anything about austerity?


poweRob said:
If I were to cut, I'd start with an audit of the DoD to see where to start. Then actually listen to the active military forces in what equipment they don't need anymore rather than having congress forcefeed the military equipment they don't need nor want but because it's built in their district... they have to take it.
Click to expand...
LOL, ah, the ol' "cut the military" non-answer. :roll:
 
Bullseye said:
That's total bull****. They matter all the time. Which trillion dollars of spending would you like to cut to stop the deficit? maybe take away granny's Medicare and Social Security? Send home all the none essential government employees? Your call.
Click to expand...

If they matter all the time the GOP wouldn't have just blown up the deficit with an unnecessary tax cut.
 
Greenbeard said:
If they matter all the time the GOP wouldn't have just blown up the deficit with an unnecessary tax cut.
Click to expand...
Do you believe that a flat GDP should be the norm?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Greenbeard said:
If they matter all the time the GOP wouldn't have just blown up the deficit with an unnecessary tax cut.
Click to expand...
Wrong on both counts: deficit has not been "blown", and the tax cuts WERE necessary to boost the economy from the moribund Obama economy and to ensure continued growth and prosperity. By the way - the CBO just re-evaluated its projections from last spring and is saying this year's deficit will be $75 million less that they had projected then, and that the accumulated 10 year deficit will be $1.25 TRILLION less than they'd projected. And THAT is after only one year of those "unnecessary tax cuts".

The part of the deficit that no one seems willing to deal with remains spending growth as it has been for decades. That's the problem I'm most pessimistic about - get a hand on spending goes against politicians natural tendency to throw money at every problem and never waste an opportunity to buy votes.
 
Greenbeard said:
If they matter all the time the GOP wouldn't have just blown up the deficit with an unnecessary tax cut.
Click to expand...

deficits and debt don't matter remember so why are you complaining about it now?
that was your mantra during the last administration.
 
Bullseye said:
Wrong on both counts: deficit has not been "blown", and the tax cuts WERE necessary to boost the economy from the moribund Obama economy and to ensure continued growth and prosperity.
Click to expand...

The deficit is over $900B right now thanks to the GOP, heading for an annual deficit in excess of $1 trillion. For no reason.

By the way - the CBO just re-evaluated its projections from last spring and is saying this year's deficit will be $75 million less that they had projected then, and that the accumulated 10 year deficit will be $1.25 TRILLION less than they'd projected. And THAT is after only one year of those "unnecessary tax cuts".
Click to expand...

Which has nothing to do with the tax cuts. It has to do with how future emergency disaster relief funding is estimated.

The substantial reduction over the 10-year period is almost entirely because appropriations for 2019 that are designated as emergency requirements total $2 billion so far—a sharp reduction from the $108 billion that was appropriated in 2018, mostly for relief and recovery efforts related to the hurricanes and wildfires that occurred in 2017. In accordance with the statutory rules that govern the agency’s projections of discretionary spending, CBO’s adjusted April 2018 projections were based on the amounts appropriated for 2018 (adjusted for inflation). CBO’s current projections, by contrast, are based on the much smaller amount of funding provided for 2019.
Click to expand...

The tax cuts are good because for the moment we're pretending there won't be any hurricanes, wildfires, or earthquakes over the next decade? Great argument.

ludin said:
deficits and debt don't matter remember so why are you complaining about it now?
that was your mantra during the last administration.
Click to expand...

That's literally a Dick Cheney quote. It was the mantra of the previous GOP administration. And, apparently, the current one.
 
Last edited:
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

National debt hits new milestone, topping $22 trillion
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The national debt has passed a new milestone, topping $22 trillion for the first time.

The Treasury Department’s daily statement showed Tuesday that total outstanding public debt stands at $22.01 trillion. It stood at $19.95 trillion when President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20, 2017.

The debt figure has been accelerating since the passage of Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax cut in December 2017 and action by Congress last year to increase spending on domestic and military programs.

The national debt is the total of the annual budget deficits. The Congressional Budget Office projects that this year’s deficit will be $897 billion — a 15.1 percent increase over last year’s imbalance of $779 billion. In the coming years, the CBO forecasts that the deficit will keep rising, top $1 trillion annually beginning in 2022 and never drop below $1 trillion through 2029. Much of the increase will come from mounting costs to fund Social Security and Medicare as the vast generation of baby boomers continue to retire.

The Trump administration contends that its tax cuts will eventually pay for themselves by generating faster economic growth. That projection is disputed by many economists.

COMMENT:-

When Mr. Trump's tax cuts finally cut in, Mr. Trump will be able to claim that He was responsible for lowering America's national debt from the highest point that it had ever been.

PS - Enjoy your "new and improved" tax refund.
​
Click to expand...

Don't worry the AOC Green Program and Nancy Pelosi will cut the deficit by making the rich pay more, all is good!!
 
Greenbeard said:
The deficit is over $900B right now thanks to the GOP, heading for an annual deficit in excess of $1 trillion. For no reason.



Which has nothing to do with the tax cuts. It has to do with how future emergency disaster relief funding is estimated.



That tax cuts are good because for the moment we're pretending there won't be any hurricanes, wildfires, or earthquakes over the next decade? Great argument.



That's literally a Dick Cheney quote. It was the mantra of the previous GOP administration. And, apparently, the current one.
Click to expand...

Do you get paid to post lies over and over again?? The GOP had very little to do with the 2018 deficit as it had everything to do with the 4 interest rate hikes and entitlement spending increases
 
apdst said:
This is how it's better:
Click to expand...

Sure, ignore the completely different economic circumstances they walked into respectively :lamo
 
Conservative said:
Do you get paid to post lies over and over again?? The GOP had very little to do with the 2018 deficit as it had everything to do with the 4 interest rate hikes and entitlement spending increases
Click to expand...

This year is 2019.
 
Greenbeard said:
The deficit is over $900B right now thanks to the GOP, heading for an annual deficit in excess of $1 trillion. For no reason.
Click to expand...
Sorry, facts, or at least educated guess by CBO carries more weight than your lib platter.


Greenbeard said:
Which has nothing to do with the tax cuts. It has to do with how future emergency disaster relief funding is estimated.
Click to expand...
Instead of just linking to the front cover, let's flip the page.

In CBO’s projections, the federal budget deficit is about $900 billion in 2019 and exceeds $1 trillion each year beginning in 2022. Over the coming decade, deficits (after adjustments to exclude shifts in the timing of certain payments) fluctuate between 4.1 percent and 4.7 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), well above the average over the past 50*years (see Chapter 1). CBO’s projection of the deficit for 2019 is now $75 billion less—and its projection of the cumulative deficit over the 2019–2028 period, $1.2 trillion less—than it was in spring 2018. That reduction in projected deficits results primarily from legislative changes—most notably, a decrease in emergency spending (see Appendix A).
Click to expand...
Just like I said.


greenbeard said:
The tax cuts are good because for the moment we're pretending there won't be any hurricanes, wildfires, or earthquakes over the next decade? Great argument.
Click to expand...
WTF are you talking about.


Greenbeard said:
That's literally a Dick Cheney quote. It was the mantra of the previous GOP administration. And, apparently, the current one.
Click to expand...
Same question as above.
 
Greenbeard said:
This year is 2019.
Click to expand...

And negative PROJECTIONS only spread liberal misery, what happens when they don't materialize? you people continue to promote nothing but negative economic policies and massive gov't spending, why is that?

I have found people from the left in this forum totally incapable of researching data and being positive on any issue. They refuse to admit when wrong. Why do we need a 4.4 trillion dollar gov't when state and local revenue are setting records?

Do you understand what CBO is? Please stop quoting a group that although non partisan is seldom right on any issue. They take what Congress gives them and makes PROJECTIONS and when wrong they correct them but you ignore the correction
 
Conservative said:
And negative PROJECTIONS only spread liberal misery, what happens when they don't materialize? you people continue to promote nothing but negative economic policies and massive gov't spending, why is that?

I have found people from the left in this forum totally incapable of researching data and being positive on any issue. They refuse to admit when wrong. Why do we need a 4.4 trillion dollar gov't when state and local revenue are setting records?

Do you understand what CBO is? Please stop quoting a group that although non partisan is seldom right on any issue. They take what Congress gives them and makes PROJECTIONS and when wrong they correct them but you ignore the correction
Click to expand...

I agree. A $4.4 trillion government is too much. Way, way too much.
 
Bullseye said:
Sorry, facts, or at least educated guess by CBO carries more weight than your lib platter.


Instead of just linking to the front cover, let's flip the page.

Just like I said.


WTF are you talking about.


Same question as above.
Click to expand...

Are you illiterate? I just quoted what I'm talking about. The reason for the irrelevant change in spending projections since April you keep highlighting is entirely based on how future disaster spending appropriations are projected. In April the CBO had to project out using FY2018 appropriations, last month they had to project the next decade of disaster spending based on YTD FY19 emergency disaster spending appropriations. Which so far are low.

Here, let me waste my time doing it again. This time I'll put the text in another color in a futile bid to hold your attention through three sentences.

The substantial reduction over the 10-year period is almost entirely because appropriations for 2019 that are designated as emergency requirements total $2 billion so far—a sharp reduction from the $108 billion that was appropriated in 2018, mostly for relief and recovery efforts related to the hurricanes and wildfires that occurred in 2017. In accordance with the statutory rules that govern the agency’s projections of discretionary spending, CBO’s adjusted April 2018 projections were based on the amounts appropriated for 2018 (adjusted for inflation). CBO’s current projections, by contrast, are based on the much smaller amount of funding provided for 2019.
Click to expand...

Do I think it's likely we're going to have virtually no disaster spending over the next decade on hurricanes, wildfires, and the like? No. Even if we miraculously do, does that have anything to do with any of the fiscal decisions being made in this thread? No.

Read reports before trying to talk about what's in them.
 
Last edited:
Greenbeard said:
Are you illiterate? I just quoted what I'm talking about. The reason for the irrelevant change in spending projections since April you keep highlighting is entirely based on how future disaster spending appropriations are projected. In April the CBO had to project out using FY2018 appropriations, last month they had to project the next decade of disaster spending based on YTD FY19 emergency disaster spending appropriations. Which so far are low.

Here, let me waste my time doing it again. I'll put the text in another color in a futile bid to hold your attention through three sentences.



Do I think it's likely we're going to have virtually no disaster spending over the next decade on hurricanes, wildfires, and the like? No. Even if we miraculously do, does that have anything to do with any of the fiscal decisions being made in this thread? No.

Read reports before trying to talk about what's in them.
Click to expand...

Let me put it in bold for you as well, NOTHING is going to change your mind or your double standards on the issue of the deficits, the debt, and the role of the federal gov't

Trump has done what he can by supporting a budget showing ACTUAL cuts in Departments and has ACTUALLY CUT HIS EXECUTIVE BRANCH SPENDING. Presidents can only spend what they are authorized by Congress to spend and most if not all of the deficit increases for 2018 and now projected for 2019 have nothing to do with tax cuts, discretionary spending but rather due mostly to entitlement spending and debt service increases due to interest rate hikes.

Keep believing what you are told by the left and keep seeing your credibility drop. CBO is a tool used by the media and Congress to promote whatever narrative they want to deliver. CBO only presents analysis based upon the data they are given by Congress and do a very poor job projecting revenue growth, GDP growth, or interest expenses.

Let's see again how little interest you have in this subject with Pelosi and Democrats in office promoting things like the Green Program or increases in entitlements?
 
Conservative said:
most if not all of the deficit increases for 2018 and now projected for 2019 have nothing to do with tax cuts, discretionary spending but rather due mostly to entitlement spending and debt service increases due to interest rate hikes.
Click to expand...

The deficit is due to not having enough revenue to cover spending. What do you think a deficit is?
 
Greenbeard said:
The deficit is due to not having enough revenue to cover spending. What do you think a deficit is?
Click to expand...
Or too much spending, why isn't that an issue for you?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
 
Greenbeard said:
Are you illiterate? I just quoted what I'm talking about. The reason for the irrelevant change in spending projections since April you keep highlighting is entirely based on how future disaster spending appropriations are projected. In April the CBO had to project out using FY2018 appropriations, last month they had to project the next decade of disaster spending based on YTD FY19 emergency disaster spending appropriations. Which so far are low.

Here, let me waste my time doing it again. This time I'll put the text in another color in a futile bid to hold your attention through three sentences.



Do I think it's likely we're going to have virtually no disaster spending over the next decade on hurricanes, wildfires, and the like? No. Even if we miraculously do, does that have anything to do with any of the fiscal decisions being made in this thread? No.

Read reports before trying to talk about what's in them.
Click to expand...
Maybe instead of being the classic liberal asshat you should read the report yourself, and actually understand what you're reading. But you won't. Don't bother responding, I ignore Richard Heads.
 
Greenbeard said:
The deficit is due to not having enough revenue to cover spending. What do you think a deficit is?
Click to expand...

That's really backwards. A deficit is spending more than you take in. On a personal level, you can't blame your credit card debt on your boss for not giving you a raise -- the problem is that you spent too much. Spending is where you have most of the control. Same with the federal government. Outside of a recession recovery, revenue is going to be fairly stable. Yes, you can make minor adjustments, but the difference is almost always on the spending side.

Current situation - revenue did fall... by less than one percent. We knew that was going to happen, exchanging some short term revenue in return for long term growth. Still, $3.3 T is a healthy amount to work with, and not significantly different than $3.32 T in 20017, $3.27 in 2016, or $3.25 in 2015. 1% of $3.3 Trillion is $33 billion, and the drop was less than that. Even if you say 'we should have increased by 3% to keep up with GDP... you are still talking about a difference of $132 billion less than we 'should have' taken in, that's not where the problem lies. The issue is on the spending side of the ledger.



Federal revenue fell in first year after U.S. tax overhaul - CBS News

US Federal Tax Revenue by Year
 
Greenbeard said:
The deficit is due to not having enough revenue to cover spending. What do you think a deficit is?
Click to expand...

Is a "debate" based on the opposing positions of:

  1. "The deficit is caused by income being less then expenditures."; or
  2. "The deficit is caused by expenditures being more than income.";

really a "rational" debate?

PS - As I understand it, "Conservative" thinks a deficit is "something that is caused by liberals".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom