• 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!

Only two Presidents in last 50 year to reduce the deficit

Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

I thought we were discussin the interest on treasury bonds.

And yes, when inflation rises or falls, interest rates rise and fall with inflation.

And the interest on treasury bonds is set by.... ??? the fed rate that I just discussed.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

That is a fine claim to make, but again, you are not showing any numbers. For you to prove your point you need to show the revenue inputs, showing that the ACA numbers had some significant impact on revenue increases compared to the effect of overall increases in economic activity impact on revenue.

i stated that new taxes created from the ACA , which were made law and collected, added to the additional amount of revenue collected and as such this lowered the deficit.

those new taxes lowered the deficit because they were NEW sources of revenue which had not existed before.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

i stated that new taxes created from the ACA , which were made law and collected, added to the additional amount of revenue collected and as such this lowered the deficit.

those new taxes lowered the deficit because they were NEW sources of revenue which had not existed before.
I know that is what you keep whittling down, reducing and reducing, if you are going to continue with this absolute argument...fine. If you don't want to show what the LEVEL of this new taxation was, what impact it had upon ADDITIONAL revenue in real terms.....fine, but that is not proving your point. You aren't showing that the additional revenue went above and beyond the additional costs, which is always the complaint your side makes. So if these taxes did not exceed the additional costs, they are not responsible for reducing the deficit absolutely or significantly. The whole plan for ACA was to be revenue neutral, if you want to argue that it is revenue positive.....cool....but it is a weird position for a con to take.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

I know that is what you keep whittling down, reducing and reducing, if you are going to continue with this absolute argument...fine. If you don't want to show what the LEVEL of this new taxation was, what impact it had upon ADDITIONAL revenue in real terms.....fine, but that i is not proving your point. You aren't showing that the additional revenue went above and beyond the additional costs, which is always the complaint your side makes. So if these taxes did not exceed the additional costs, they are not responsible for reducing the deficit absolutely of significantly. The whole plan for ACA was to be revenue neutral, if you want to argue that it is revenue positive.....cool....but it is a weird position for a con to take.

so are you saying i have too produce the actual amount of revenue that each one of these taxes collected, is that what you are saying?
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

so are you saying i have too produce the actual amount of revenue that each one of these taxes collected, is that what you are saying?
You were claiming it is not revenue neutral, it is revenue positive, it reduced the deficit by collecting more revenue than the programs cost.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

You were claiming it is not revenue neutral, it is revenue positive, it reduced the deficit by collecting more revenue than the programs cost.

i am stating that these taxes which were created were NEW collections and added to treasury revenue, that is fact .......because that revenue did not exist prior.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

i am stating that these taxes which were created were NEW collections and added to treasury revenue, that is fact .......because that revenue did not exist prior.
And again you whittle down further, while at the same time continuing to fail with math. A deficit occurs when a COST exceeds revenue. You don't want to examine the cost, you want to ignore it and claim that the revenues from the ACA exceeded the costs, those ACA revenues went above and beyond the ACA costs then contributed to lowering the deficit....again....you are claiming the ACA revenues are revenue positive.

I just don't understand why this VERY simple math eludes you....nay, I take it back, I do know.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

And again you whittle down further, while at the same time continuing to fail with math. A deficit occurs when a COST exceeds revenue. You don't want to examine the cost, you want to ignore it and claim that the revenues from the ACA exceeded the costs, those ACA revenues went above and beyond the ACA costs then contributed to lowering the deficit....again....you are claiming the ACA revenues are revenue positive.

I just don't understand why this VERY simple math eludes you....nay, I take it back, I do know.

is this to hard for you?

the government instituted new taxes, which did not exist prior, those new taxes bought in additional revenue to the treasury because no such taxes were collected the prior year.

now this is not difficult
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

is this to (sic) hard for you?
on the contrary, it is obvious the math is beyond your grasp.

the government instituted new taxes, which did not exist prior, those new taxes bought in additional revenue to the treasury because no such taxes were collected the prior year.

now this is not difficult
Again, you made the claim that the ACA taxes reduced the deficit, that can only happen if the ACA is revenue positive.

You have dropped the word deficit because it involves the math of including COSTS.

Yes, the ACA included new taxes, it also included new costs.....that you now want to ignore.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

on the contrary, it is obvious the math is beyond your grasp.

Again, you made the claim that the ACA taxes reduced the deficit, that can only happen if the ACA is revenue positive.

You have dropped the word deficit because it involves the math of including COSTS.

Yes, the ACA included new taxes, it also included new costs.....that you now want to ignore.

are you saying that the taxes instututed by the ACA, TOOK AWAY tax revenues THE GOVERNMENT COLLECTS.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

are you saying that the taxes instututed by the ACA, TOOK AWAY tax revenues THE GOVERNMENT COLLECTS.
"took away the revenues"?
WTF!

Revenues pay for costs (am I really having to post this, FFS!). If the ACA revenues exceed ACA costs, then those revenues above and beyond the costs can lower the DEFICIT.

Remember your original post?:

obamacare taxes kicked in , new revenue to the the IRS lowered deficit for obama

Again, this is ONLY true if the ACA is revenue positive.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

"took away the revenues"?
WTF!

Revenues pay for costs (am I really having to post this, FFS!). If the ACA revenues exceed ACA costs, then those revenues above and beyond the costs can lower the DEFICIT.

Remember your original post?:



Again, this is ONLY true if the ACA is revenue positive.

is this to simple for you.

the government instituted new taxes, and the government collected these taxes, bringing in fresh revenue to the treasury which did not exist the prior year because of those new taxes, that is an increase in revenue to the treasury....plain an simple
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

is this to simple for you.

the government instituted new taxes, and the government collected these taxes, bringing in fresh revenue to the treasury which did not exist the prior year because of those new taxes, that is an increase in revenue to the treasury....plain an simple
There is no doubt that the ACA included "NEW" revenue. AGREED.

That is not your argument.

Your argument is that the "NEW" revenue from the ACA caused the TOTAL US FED DEFICIT TO DECLINE......ergo.....the ACA was revenue positive, meaning the ACA brought in revenue beyond the costs of the ACA.

This is so simple, you have forgotten your argument, you dropped your deficit claim, and you refuse to accept that the ACA has costs.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

There is no doubt that the ACA included "NEW" revenue. AGREED.

That is not your argument.

Your argument is that the "NEW" revenue from the ACA caused the TOTAL US FED DEFICIT TO DECLINE......ergo.....the ACA was revenue positive, meaning the ACA brought in revenue beyond the costs of the ACA.

This is so simple, you have forgotten your argument, you dropped your deficit claim, and you refuse to accept that the ACA has costs.


i stated that revenue from the ACA, brought in additional revenue to the treasury bringing the deficit down.

to the bold
, are you stating the ACA cost more then the revenue in the bill via taxes, even though ACA is not even paying out YET!, so the program was created negative in cost even before even IT provides to the people
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

i stated that revenue from the ACA, brought in additional revenue to the treasury bringing the deficit down.
yes, that is what u said, but you have no understanding of what deficit means.



to the bold[/B], are you stating the ACA cost more then (sic) the revenue in the bill via taxes, even though ACA is not even paying out YET!, so the program was created negative in cost even before even IT provides to the people
What you bolded, as I made clear, is the implication of your argument, and the reason I believe this explanation is incomprehensible to you, is due to the fact that you have no idea what "revenue positive" means.

If you don't know what the term(s) means, don't use them.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

yes, that is what u said, but you have no understanding of what deficit means.



What you bolded, as I made clear, is the implication of your argument, and the reason I believe this explanation is incomprehensible to you, is due to the fact that you have no idea what "revenue positive" means.

If you don't know what the term(s) means, don't use them.

oh i do,

and here is what you do not understand

when the ACA was being put forth before congress one of the road blocks it faced was IT WAS TO EXPENSE and could not be paid for, and this was a valid argument the left could not seem get around.

however to go around the problem the program was to be delayed in the bill and not take effect for years, and to this day the plan is not paying anything yet!

however the plan passed in march 2010 DID put the taxes for the plan UPFRONT and taxes where being collected in 2010 and every year before the website/ the struture of the ACA was ever created.

so government was collecting new taxes, on a plan which had not even been implemented in its scope or structure because it might be found to be unconstitutional.

the Obamacare web site did not even appear until late 2013
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

yes, that is what u said, but you have no understanding of what deficit means.



What you bolded, as I made clear, is the implication of your argument, and the reason I believe this explanation is incomprehensible to you, is due to the fact that you have no idea what "revenue positive" means.

If you don't know what the term(s) means, don't use them.

since i have followed politics and government since jimmy carter i know.

again the plan was not in effect, the structure was not in play because of the problems it faced in court and there was no money for it, that is why taxes came first to sell the plan and to make it look like it could be paid for....., and the struture next, and then the pay out whenever that is!
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

oh i do,

and here is what you do not understand

when the ACA was being put forth before congress one of the road blocks it faced was IT WAS TO EXPENSE and could not be paid for, and this was a valid argument the left could not seem get around.

however to go around the problem the program was to be delayed in the bill and not take effect for years, and to this day the plan is not paying anything yet!

however the plan passed in march 2010 DID put the taxes for the plan UPFRONT and taxes where being collected in 2010 and every year before the website/ the struture of the ACA was ever created.

so government was collecting new taxes, on a plan which had not even been implemented in its scope or structure because it might be found to be unconstitutional.

the Obamacare web site did not even appear until late 2013
It was being created in that time period, there were costs being generated, and the burden of proof remains on you to show the numbers, you have not, I expect it to remain so.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

It was being created in that time period, there were costs being generated, and the burden of proof remains on you to show the numbers, you have not, I expect it to remain so.

the taxes came first ....because that is how the plan was sold.

the structure came next in 2013 and the pay out is still to come and when that happens watch out for the deficut.

government projects deficit rising
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

the taxes came first ....because that is how the plan was sold.

the structure came next in 2013 and the pay out is still to come and when that happens watch out for the deficut.

government projects deficit rising
when I see not providing any numbers to back your original claim.....combined with argument of "deficut" in the future, I know that this is, as usual, a waste of time, that this exercise has been a satisfying of your need for attention and that you as usual bring nothing to the table.
 
Re: Only two Presidents ion last 50 year to reduce the deficit

when I see not providing any numbers to back your original claim.....combined with argument of "deficut" in the future, I know that this is, as usual, a waste of time, that this exercise has been a satisfying of your need for attention and that you as usual bring nothing to the table.

i stated this, that taxes were collected on Obamacare first in 2010 and every year new taxes were becoming law, and more revenue, but Obamacare as a plan /structure did not go into effect because there was no money for it, and that was the problem passing the plan in the first place, so taxes got collected and this reduced the deficit, then web site came online in late 2013, along with the exchanges being created, and the pay off is still waiting to happen.
 
Back
Top Bottom