Page 19 of 33 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 325

Thread: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

  1. #181
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    lincoln park
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,041

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You picked one year and ignored 2015, 2016 and 2017 what were the deficits??
    I didn't ignore anything. I provide context to the deficit reduction experienced between 2009 and 2015. By 2015, the Federal deficit was $439 billion. This is simply a matter of fact.

    What effect did 7 interest rate hikes have on the 2017-2018 deficits?
    Little if nothing. Interest rates are already at historic lows, and long term borrowing has barely budged (see the inversion of yields).

    What effect did the mandatory entitlement spending increases have on the deficits??
    They have increased in concurrence with tax cuts, which have reduced revenue well below the baseline.

    You keep complaining about Federal Revenue but never the fact that 44% of income earning Americans don't pay ANY Federal Income Taxes
    They don't earn enough money to pay taxes. Furthermore, taxing these people would actually hurt revenue, as it reduces both consumption and subsequent investment that results from this reduction in corporate revenue.

    I post official data in context
    You cherry pick to your hearts content. You're totally oblivious to basic data analysis, referring to such practice as fancy liberal math.

    how do you explain record revenue collected by state, local governments and charities in 2018?
    The same could be said in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, etc..... In other words, you're not telling us anything that hasn't been going on for years. It's simply a continuation of a trend (which you cannot negate).

    how do you explain record dividends paid to S&P shareholders in 2018?
    Was this not the case in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012?

    In your world there never are any consequences for higher federal revenue so where does the state get more revenue when citizens are forced to pay higher federal taxes?
    It's not a zero-sum game. The state derives a considerable portion of revenue from the Federal Government.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  2. #182
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    85,613

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    I didn't ignore anything. I provide context to the deficit reduction experienced between 2009 and 2015. By 2015, the Federal deficit was $439 billion. This is simply a matter of fact.



    Little if nothing. Interest rates are already at historic lows, and long term borrowing has barely budged (see the inversion of yields).



    They have increased in concurrence with tax cuts, which have reduced revenue well below the baseline.



    They don't earn enough money to pay taxes. Furthermore, taxing these people would actually hurt revenue, as it reduces both consumption and subsequent investment that results from this reduction in corporate revenue.



    You cherry pick to your hearts content. You're totally oblivious to basic data analysis, referring to such practice as fancy liberal math.



    The same could be said in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, etc..... In other words, you're not telling us anything that hasn't been going on for years. It's simply a continuation of a trend (which you cannot negate).



    Was this not the case in 2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012?



    It's not a zero-sum game. The state derives a considerable portion of revenue from the Federal Government.
    This is a complete waste of time, you aren't going to change my mind and I am not going to change your mind. You are a big gov't liberal who believes it is the government that needs the money more than the taxpayers and have zero understanding of what taxes you pay and their purpose. You are worried about a debt that was driven up by 9.3 trillion under Obama and don't give a damn that 44% of income earners pay zero in FIT. Have a good life, we are done again

  3. #183
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    lincoln park
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,041

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    This is a complete waste of time, you aren't going to change my mind and I am not going to change your mind.
    It's not about changing minds... it's about accuracy and validity. You make **** up, pick cherries, and ignore everything stated only to repeat your partisan drivel. Which is fine, as it exposes you for what you are.

    You are a big gov't liberal who believes it is the government that needs the money more than the taxpayers and have zero understanding of what taxes you pay and their purpose.
    Your opinion of me doesn't matter. You cannot refute my arguments, and that is all that matters in these exchanges. You say something wrong/invalid and i am here to set the record straight.

    Have a good life, we are done again
    Your lack of courage and inability to make your point has been put on full display.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  4. #184
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    85,613

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    It's not about changing minds... it's about accuracy and validity. You make **** up, pick cherries, and ignore everything stated only to repeat your partisan drivel. Which is fine, as it exposes you for what you are.



    Your opinion of me doesn't matter. You cannot refute my arguments, and that is all that matters in these exchanges. You say something wrong/invalid and i am here to set the record straight.



    Your lack of courage and inability to make your point has been put on full display.
    Trump is President, the budget is 4.7 trillion dollars of which 1.4 trillion is discretionary and 3.3 trillion is mandatory. 44% of income earning Americans don't pay any Federal Income taxes that fund the operating expenses of the U.S. none of which are included in that 3.3 trillion mandatory spending. The top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes paid but that apparently isn't enough for some people nor is the reality that corporations aren't people, aren't costing the federal gov't anything but are benefiting state and local governments, charities. Transportation and infrastructure are paid by excise taxes, SS and Medicare are funded by FICA taxes. You want to balance the budget raise the taxes that fund the items causing the deficits, mandatory spending and then collect something from the 44% of income earners paying zero in FIT to cover the discretionary spending but that isn't good enough for radicals.

    Radicals need to learn the taxes they pay and their purpose. Radicals need to stop promoting class warfare. Radicals need to learn the components of GDP, and radicals need to learn that part time jobs aren't the same as full time jobs. When radicals learn those items then there can be a rational discussion of the issues but simply calling for higher taxes to fund bureaucrats creates more dependence and more power for the bureaucrats. People keeping more of what they earn need less of that so called gov't help the left promotes and therein lies the problem

  5. #185
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    lincoln park
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,041

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Here's the problem with you. You claim something like $3.3 trillion mandatory spending but fail to provide links to your sources. When someone like myself points out this is an entirely exaggerated figure, you choose to ignore the error and shift to some other tangent.



    When undisputable data is presented, you have nothing to offer other than some excuse or misapplication of a conflicting source. For example, when the budget deficit is highlighted, you like to make excuses about interest expenses, often citing gross interest which includes state and local interest expenses. When i go another step further in explaining how this rebuttal is invalid, i am told to take it up with BEA.gov. The problem arose due to your inability to comprehend the data. I have no doubt this is going to continue.

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    44% of income earning Americans don't pay any Federal Income taxes that fund the operating expenses
    What are defining as operating expenses?

    of the U.S. none of which are included in that 3.3 trillion mandatory spending.



    The top 1% pay 40% of all income taxes paid
    So. They earn what percentage of total income. Furthermore, what percentage of total income actually ends up in the coffers? You cannot explain why providing tax relief to the wealthy at the behest of fiscally conservative budgetary management hasn't created the job creation promised.

    You want to balance the budget raise the taxes that fund the items causing the deficits, mandatory spending and then collect something from the 44% of income earners paying zero in FIT to cover the discretionary spending but that isn't good enough for radicals.
    What a poorly written sentence. I don't know where to respond because i am not entirely sure what you're trying to say other than partisan drivel.

    Radicals need to learn the components of GDP
    You need to learn the components of GDP, and what actually measure and entail.

    and radicals need to learn that part time jobs aren't the same as full time jobs.
    You need to understand the difference between part time jobs and full time jobs:



    When radicals learn those items then there can be a rational discussion of the issues but simply calling for higher taxes to fund bureaucrats creates more dependence and more power for the bureaucrats.
    Another incomplete sentence.

    People keeping more of what they earn need less of that so called gov't help the left promotes and therein lies the problem
    Your opinion isn't worthy of consideration, given you refuse to learn about these kinds of topics.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  6. #186
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    85,613

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Here's the problem with you. You claim something like $3.3 trillion mandatory spending but fail to provide links to your sources. When someone like myself points out this is an entirely exaggerated figure, you choose to ignore the error and shift to some other tangent.



    When undisputable data is presented, you have nothing to offer other than some excuse or misapplication of a conflicting source. For example, when the budget deficit is highlighted, you like to make excuses about interest expenses, often citing gross interest which includes state and local interest expenses. When i go another step further in explaining how this rebuttal is invalid, i am told to take it up with BEA.gov. The problem arose due to your inability to comprehend the data. I have no doubt this is going to continue.



    What are defining as operating expenses?








    So. They earn what percentage of total income. Furthermore, what percentage of total income actually ends up in the coffers? You cannot explain why providing tax relief to the wealthy at the behest of fiscally conservative budgetary management hasn't created the job creation promised.



    What a poorly written sentence. I don't know where to respond because i am not entirely sure what you're trying to say other than partisan drivel.



    You need to learn the components of GDP, and what actually measure and entail.



    You need to understand the difference between part time jobs and full time jobs:





    Another incomplete sentence.



    Your opinion isn't worthy of consideration, given you refuse to learn about these kinds of topics.
    US Federal Budget Breakdown

    Notice the increase in Interest expense? Of course not since you live in that liberal dream world and always promote more revenue going to the federal gov't for bureaucrats to spend.

    Again, no response to the post and just more diversion from reality. Again, what a waste of time as you don't even understand the charts you post. Numbers matter, 146 million employed should have been the base not 138 million that employment went to AFTER the Obama stimulus for shovel ready jobs. 146 was the employment number from January 2008-March 2008.

    January 2008 146 million employed including 4.7 million Part time for economic reasons

    January 2017 152 million employed including 5.7 million part time for economic reasons

    You spend a lot of time posting charts but never respond when refuted

  7. #187
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    85,613

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Here's the problem with you. You claim something like $3.3 trillion mandatory spending but fail to provide links to your sources. When someone like myself points out this is an entirely exaggerated figure, you choose to ignore the error and shift to some other tangent.



    When undisputable data is presented, you have nothing to offer other than some excuse or misapplication of a conflicting source. For example, when the budget deficit is highlighted, you like to make excuses about interest expenses, often citing gross interest which includes state and local interest expenses. When i go another step further in explaining how this rebuttal is invalid, i am told to take it up with BEA.gov. The problem arose due to your inability to comprehend the data. I have no doubt this is going to continue.



    What are defining as operating expenses?








    So. They earn what percentage of total income. Furthermore, what percentage of total income actually ends up in the coffers? You cannot explain why providing tax relief to the wealthy at the behest of fiscally conservative budgetary management hasn't created the job creation promised.



    What a poorly written sentence. I don't know where to respond because i am not entirely sure what you're trying to say other than partisan drivel.



    You need to learn the components of GDP, and what actually measure and entail.



    You need to understand the difference between part time jobs and full time jobs:

    Another incomplete sentence.



    Your opinion isn't worthy of consideration, given you refuse to learn about these kinds of topics.
    What you continue to post shows liberal arrogance and ignorance of reality. No response to Post 184 again as usual. Why would anyone support raising income taxes to fund the shortfall in Entitlement spending increases when FIT was never intended to fund that social spending?

    Again, failure of a radical like you to explain why you never propose solutions other than raising taxes on the rich to fund entitlement and debt service spending when 44% of income earning Americans pay ZERO in FIT? You continue to show that you have no understanding of the line items in the budget, what taxes you pay or their purpose.

    The following are the line items in the budget and the taxes created to fund them. You and the other radicals ignore reality, ignore the taxes you pay and always support funding the bureaucrats rather than allowing taxpayers to need less of that supposed held from bureaucrats

    Trump's 1.47 trillion dollar discretionary spending items funded by FIT whereas mandatory spending is 3.3 trillion dollars mostly funded by FICA that Obama cut giving people what you call a tax cut that actually cut spending for SS and Medicare which bureaucrats have abused for years. Now run like you always do

    National defense-FIT
    International affairs-FIT
    General science, space, and technology-FIT
    Energy-FIT
    Natural resources and environment-FIT
    Agriculture-FIT
    Commerce and housing credit-FIT
    Transportation-EXCISE
    Community and regional development-FIT
    Education, training, employment and social services-FIT
    Health-FIT
    Medicare-FICA
    Income security-FIT
    Social security-FICA
    Veterans benefits and services-FIT
    Administration of justice-FIT
    General Government-FIT
    Net interest-FIT

  8. #188
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    lincoln park
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,041

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Trump's proposed budget isn't even law, nor did it have a snowball's chance in hell of passing even with a Republican controlled Congress (which is why it didn't pass).

    Notice the increase in Interest expense?


    Again, no response to the post and just more diversion from reality. Again, what a waste of time as you don't even understand the charts you post. Numbers matter, 146 million employed should have been the base not 138 million that employment went to AFTER the Obama stimulus for shovel ready jobs. 146 was the employment number from January 2008-March 2008.
    I responded point by point.

    January 2008 146 million employed including 4.7 million Part time for economic reasons

    January 2017 152 million employed including 5.7 million part time for economic reasons
    This failure in reasoning has already been addressed in multiple threads. Repeating yourself isn't a valid debate technique.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  9. #189
    I'm not-low all the time
    Kushinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    lincoln park
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,041

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    No response to Post 184 again as usual.
    I responded point by point. Are you incapable of comprehending your own failure?

    Why would anyone support raising income taxes...
    It's the only plausible way of addressing the majority of our budget gap.

    44% of income earning Americans pay ZERO in FIT
    Because they don't earn enough.

    You continue to show that you have no understanding of the line items in the budget, what taxes you pay or their purpose.
    This is a lie.

    The following are the line items in the budget and the taxes created to fund them.
    Your opinions of what taxes are supposed to fund what expenditures doesn't account for reality. The fact of the matter is we will have a deficit very close to $1 trillion in fiscal year 2019.

    You and the other radicals ignore reality, ignore the taxes you pay and always support funding the bureaucrats rather than allowing taxpayers to need less of that supposed held from bureaucrats
    Another poorly constructed sentence.

    Trump's 1.47 trillion
    Trump's budget didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing, nor will any of his budget proposals pass. Hence using it as some sort of baseline is another example of Conman failure.

    Now run like you always do
    I've responded point by point, something you can't even properly execute without ****ing up the formatting.
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    "Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911

  10. #190
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    85,613

    Re: Deficits are exploding – and neither party seems to care

    Quote Originally Posted by Kushinator View Post
    Trump's proposed budget isn't even law, nor did it have a snowball's chance in hell of passing even with a Republican controlled Congress (which is why it didn't pass).







    I responded point by point.



    This failure in reasoning has already been addressed in multiple threads. Repeating yourself isn't a valid debate technique.
    Still no answer to the direct questions, typical bully tactics from a self professed internet forum bully

Page 19 of 33 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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