• 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!

Budget Deficit on Path to Surpass $1 Trillion Under Trump

Mycroft said:
shrug...

I'm not pretending anything. The factual data shows that the government took in more revenue AFTER the tax reform than before it.

I suggest you spend more time looking at the facts than trying to rationalize it when the facts are inconvenient.
Click to expand...

Well, you are pretending or illogical. You're asserting that tax cuts are actually tax increases.

If you want to claim the TCJA increased revenue, then you have to know two things:

1) What would tax revenue have been under old law? This is the baseline, what we'd have collected with no change in tax policy.
2) Actual tax revenue collected post TCJA.

Compare them.

You're establishing a baseline, illogically, of $0 in growth in nominal tax revenues. Why did you pick a baseline of $0 in growth? If we didn't have TCJA, in a growing economy, with positive inflation, why would we expect tax revenue year over year to remain at the same amount, show growth of $0? We wouldn't, of course, we'd expect tax revenue to grow with inflation and growth in wages and taxable profits for businesses. Look at a revenue table here:

Access Denied

Pick any one you want and you'll see a consistent trend (outside of recession years) of revenue growing every year, because that's what we should expect with a growing economy and inflation. That growth trend is, in the simplest of terms, the baseline. You insist but cannot support a position that the proper baseline is $0 in growth....
 
JasperL said:
Well, you are pretending or illogical. You're asserting that tax cuts are actually tax increases.

If you want to claim the TCJA increased revenue, then you have to know two things:

1) What would tax revenue have been under old law? This is the baseline, what we'd have collected with no change in tax policy.
2) Actual tax revenue collected post TCJA.

Compare them.

You're establishing a baseline, illogically, of $0 in growth in nominal tax revenues. Why did you pick a baseline of $0 in growth? If we didn't have TCJA, in a growing economy, with positive inflation, why would we expect tax revenue year over year to remain at the same amount, show growth of $0? We wouldn't, of course, we'd expect tax revenue to grow with inflation and growth in wages and taxable profits for businesses. Look at a revenue table here:

Access Denied

Pick any one you want and you'll see a consistent trend (outside of recession years) of revenue growing every year, because that's what we should expect with a growing economy and inflation. That growth trend is, in the simplest of terms, the baseline. You insist but cannot support a position that the proper baseline is $0 in growth....
Click to expand...

Since you have no knowledge of how much taxes would have increase without the tax reform, any "baseline" is nothing more than a guess.

btw, you should know that guesses aren't doing so well lately.
 
jonny5 said:
None of that has anything do with what I responded to, so lets recap. You said "This budget was signed by Trump, so don't blame Democrats."

The budget was signed by democrats. You said "Revenue is NOT up"

Revenue is up.



If you want to change the subject to past predictions of hypothetical future revenue, fine, but thats not what responded to.
Click to expand...

How was the 2018 and 2019 budgets signed by Democrats? Did Hillary really win?
 
Mycroft said:
Since you have no knowledge of how much taxes would have increase without the tax reform, any "baseline" is nothing more than a guess.

btw, you should know that guesses aren't doing so well lately.
Click to expand...

You're appealing to ignorance.
 
Mycroft said:
Since you have no knowledge of how much taxes would have increase without the tax reform, any "baseline" is nothing more than a guess.
Click to expand...

We do have informed estimates of that, put out by CBO, JCT and others. If you want to assert that those estimates are worthless, they have a track record and you can evaluate that and see how well CBO projects revenue in future periods. So cite your work if you're going to dismiss our own government's estimates used for hundreds of budgeting purposes each year.

And, again, you're asserting that the proper baseline to evaluate the impact of TCJA is $0 in revenue growth, in a growing economy with positive inflation, growing wages, growing profits. Why did you choose a baseline of $0 in growth.

btw, you should know that guesses aren't doing so well lately.
Click to expand...

If you want to assert it, show your work.
 
MTAtech said:
That's completely false. Show the numbers that prove tax-cuts increased revenue. This is tax revenue from corporations, that got a big tax-cut:

061518krugman2-jumbo.png
Click to expand...
Uh, you chart ends in 2018; in case you haven't noticed we're almost 2/3s of the way through 2019. CBO's latest budget report shows gains for both personal and corporate income over last year at this time
 
Bullseye said:
Uh, you chart ends in 2018; in case you haven't noticed we're almost 2/3s of the way through 2019. CBO's latest budget report shows gains for both personal and corporate income over last year at this time
Click to expand...
The chart is annual. Do you have a crystal ball to tell us what the total will be in 2019? You want quarterly? It doesn't help your case.

fredgraph.png
 
Bullseye said:
Except the tax hike have generated increased revenue. "Pay for themselves is a bull**** pretext" - it's OUR MONEY not the government's.
Click to expand...

What tax hike? The TCJA was about a $1,500-$2,000 billion tax CUT.

Now you're arguing that the tax cut was in reality a tax increase? :confused: Interesting, and wrong.

And you're right, it is "our" money, but we use taxes to pay for spending and when we cut taxes, and don't cut spending, deficits go up. Now you want to insist tax cuts aren't tax cuts, but tax increases that take MORE OF YOUR MONEY!
 
JasperL said:
What tax hike? The TCJA was about a $1,500-$2,000 billion tax CUT.

Now you're arguing that the tax cut was in reality a tax increase? :confused: Interesting, and wrong.

And you're right, it is "our" money, but we use taxes to pay for spending and when we cut taxes, and don't cut spending, deficits go up. Now you want to insist tax cuts aren't tax cuts, but tax increases that take MORE OF YOUR MONEY!
Click to expand...

You're correct: I meant tax cuts. The rest is nonsensical jabberwocky.
 
JasperL said:
What tax hike? The TCJA was about a $1,500-$2,000 billion tax CUT.

Now you're arguing that the tax cut was in reality a tax increase? :confused: Interesting, and wrong.

And you're right, it is "our" money, but we use taxes to pay for spending and when we cut taxes, and don't cut spending, deficits go up. Now you want to insist tax cuts aren't tax cuts, but tax increases that take MORE OF YOUR MONEY!
Click to expand...
In reality, some DID get tax increases -- like me. Others got cuts, like big corporations and those that inherit money.

People in states that have high property taxes got tax increases, since they couldn't fully deduct state and local taxes.
 
Bullseye said:
You're correct: I meant tax cuts. The rest is nonsensical jabberwocky.
Click to expand...

TCJA cut revenues over the baseline of roughly $1,500-$2,000 billion. That's the amount of the tax cut depending on what estimate you want to use. Those tax cuts were supposed to leave more money in the hands of everyone and boost growth, etc., and over time (years...) that added growth would expand output and lower tax rates on that bigger pie would cause revenues to increase over the pre-TCJA baseline. Now you insist that TCJA's short term impact was to INCREASE taxes, take MORE money out of the economy than under old law. It makes no sense.

If you'd like to explain what I got wrong, the floor is yours, but I'm making YOUR argument there. Sure, it's nonsense, but that's because your argument that TCJA increased revenue is nonsense. It didn't increase revenue, it was a tax cut, and it lowered revenue. That's the POINT of tax cuts.
 
MTAtech said:
In reality, some DID get tax increases -- like me. Others got cuts, like big corporations and those that inherit money.

People in states that have high property taxes got tax increases, since they couldn't fully deduct state and local taxes.
Click to expand...

Right, some people did see tax increases, but the overall impact of the TCJA was a tax cut between $1.5T and $2T, depending on the estimate and what it included. Borrowing costs for the additional deficits increase the estimate to the higher end.

It's just frustrating that the GOP has effectively killed informed debate on this subject. We can't get our conservative friends to admit the most obvious point - that a tax cut lowers revenue, which is of course the point of them. When one side is arguing from that kind of a position of ignorance or dishonesty, we can't even START informed debate about tax policy. How can we debate tax cuts when one side believes lowering tax rates RAISES revenue? It's impossible.

On these threads I sit here dumbfounded much of the time, because I think those arguing for a magic money tree, a tax Santa, believe one exists. We're watching the power of years of right wing propaganda, and it's more than a little bit scary how well it works.
 
dcsports said:
Great point! You look at these and see massive deficits extending beyond a poorly managed recovery, driven largely by massive spending increases under Obama and a democrat controlled congress.
Click to expand...

Swing and a miss.
 
JasperL said:
TCJA cut revenues over the baseline of roughly $1,500-$2,000 billion. That's the amount of the tax cut depending on what estimate you want to use. Those tax cuts were supposed to leave more money in the hands of everyone and boost growth, etc., and over time (years...) that added growth would expand output and lower tax rates on that bigger pie would cause revenues to increase over the pre-TCJA baseline. Now you insist that TCJA's short term impact was to INCREASE taxes, take MORE money out of the economy than under old law. It makes no sense.

If you'd like to explain what I got wrong, the floor is yours, but I'm making YOUR argument there. Sure, it's nonsense, but that's because your argument that TCJA increased revenue is nonsense. It didn't increase revenue, it was a tax cut, and it lowered revenue. That's the POINT of tax cuts.
Click to expand...

I'm not interested in "estimates", or "baselines"; I'm talking actual money coming in the door, comparing this year so far in the fiscal year to last year at the same time. Oh, and technically, it WASN'T a tax cut; it was a TAX RATE REDUCTION - which frequently do raise revenues.
 
Bullseye said:
I'm not interested in "estimates", or "baselines"; I'm talking actual money coming in the door, comparing this year so far in the fiscal year to last year at the same time.
Click to expand...

If you're not interested in baselines, then you are not interested in the impact of TCJA on tax revenues. If you don't care, that's fine, but you don't get to make up stuff and ignore that the ONLY way to know the impact is to compare receipts under TCJA to the pre-TCJA baseline estimates put out by CBO or JCT.

Just say you don't care what the impact was - you got your tax cut, and that's the end of your concern. That's honest.

Oh, and technically, it WASN'T a tax cut; it was a TAX RATE REDUCTION - which frequently do raise revenues.
Click to expand...

Tax rate reductions do not in fact "frequently...raise revenues." Furthermore, you can only know that if you know the projected baseline revenues pre-rate reductions, and you just told me you are not interested in baselines. So you're contradicting yourself.
 
JasperL said:
If you're not interested in baselines, then you are not interested in the impact of TCJA on tax revenues. If you don't care, that's fine, but you don't get to make up stuff and ignore that the ONLY way to know the impact is to compare receipts under TCJA to the pre-TCJA baseline estimates put out by CBO or JCT.

Just say you don't care what the impact was - you got your tax cut, and that's the end of your concern. That's honest.



Tax rate reductions do not in fact "frequently...raise revenues." Furthermore, you can only know that if you know the projected baseline revenues pre-rate reductions, and you just told me you are not interested in baselines. So you're contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...
Sorry, no. You're spouting stuff that makes no difference to anybody but academics arguing in the alumni club. And your attempts to slam me ("i got mine" allusion") just degrades your standing. You can carry on about baselines and estimates to your heart's content; it doesn't change bottom line numbers, like it or not.
 
Bullseye said:
Sorry, no. You're spouting stuff that makes no difference to anybody but academics arguing in the alumni club. And your attempts to slam me ("i got mine" allusion") just degrades your standing. You can carry on about baselines and estimates to your heart's content; it doesn't change bottom line numbers, like it or not.
Click to expand...

I'll concede that facts and evidence make no difference to Trump lemmings.

What I'm saying about baselines and how we measure impacts of tax policy changes matters to everyone who cares about the impact of changes in tax policy, which isn't limited to academics at the alumni club, but the bond market, stock market, Congress, the Fed, WH, CBO, the military, etc. If the budget matters and deficits matter, and tax levels matter, then how we measure impacts of changes in tax policy matter and we know that from baselines, etc.
 
JasperL said:
I'll concede that facts and evidence make no difference to Trump lemmings.

What I'm saying about baselines and how we measure impacts of tax policy changes matters to everyone who cares about the impact of changes in tax policy, which isn't limited to academics at the alumni club, but the bond market, stock market, Congress, the Fed, WH, CBO, the military, etc. If the budget matters and deficits matter, and tax levels matter, then how we measure impacts of changes in tax policy matter and we know that from baselines, etc.
Click to expand...
The fact is that tax revenue trough July is 3% higher than it was a year ago at the same point. That's how WE MEASURE effects. Speaking of CBO - it's their data I'm citing. You don't like what I'm saying take it up with them.
 
Bullseye said:
The fact is that tax revenue trough July is 3% higher than it was a year ago at the same point. That's how WE MEASURE effects. Speaking of CBO - it's their data I'm citing. You don't like what I'm saying take it up with them.
Click to expand...

But that's saying nothing about the impact of TCJA on those revenues.
 
MTAtech said:
[h=1]Budget Deficit on Path to Surpass $1 Trillion Under Trump[/h]
Just like us stupid liberals said would happen when the GOP passed its tax-cut in Dec 2017, is happening. If you remember, the proponents of that tax-cut said they would pay for themselves. Well, they aren't, just as tax-cut detractors said.
Click to expand...

The only way it will pay for itself is if social programs are cut...which is their next step. Whoever wins the next election doesn’t matter. It will be “cut, cut, cut” for social programs...all we will hear about from the Republicans will be about the debt.
 
JasperL said:
But that's saying nothing about the impact of TCJA on those revenues.
Click to expand...
LOL, sure, fine. Economic growth, job growth, wage growth - none of that drives revenue growth. :roll:
 
ttwtt78640 said:
What demorat votes were those? Name them or your fantasy argument has failed completely.

115th Congress on taxes, 2017-2018 - Ballotpedia
Click to expand...

JasperL said:
Well, the tax cuts reduced revenue by about $450 billion over the baseline of pre-TCJA for the first two years, hence the big explosion in deficits.

Surely you realize that the proper baseline isn't an arbitrary number like $0 in tax revenue growth but what revenue growth would have been under old law, right?

And the GOP didn't need to bribe any Democrats to pass the tax cuts because no Democrats voted for the tax cuts. Why are you making up this stuff? Do you think we'd not notice or do you just not know what happened?
Click to expand...

Wrong reference on my part....obviously the tax bill isn't the spending bill and I was referencing how the spending is the issue.

H.R.648 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
 
Fishking said:
Wrong reference on my part....obviously the tax bill isn't the spending bill and I was referencing how the spending is the issue.

H.R.648 - 116th Congress (2019-2020): Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress
Click to expand...

OK, but that is simply business as usual with these massive "must pass", pork laden, (after?) last minute, monster "budget" bills (which nobody has read). Congress has not passed the "budget" bills on time (before the FY start) since 1997 (for FY 1998).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom