Current US Federal Budget Deficit

[OrphanSlug]

Do you understand that there are 15 Cabinet departments in the Federal Gov't and each Dept. has a budget? Each Department has line items and that is exactly what I gave you as those line items add up to the dept. budget then the total U.S. budget request created by the President. Not sure what your problem is but you don't seem to grasp basic accounting or basic U.S. Budget line items and the taxes that fund them?

What exactly is your problem with the line items and the tax created to fund those line items? Is it your belief that SS and Medicare should be funded by FIT?

Quit avoiding the mess you made... these are your assertions... so find for us (all of us amused by this) where the Treasury took only the two line items you named and explicitly said those line items alone are the reasons for that year’s fiscal deficit.

We are *still* waiting...

 

[Conservative]

Quit avoiding the mess you made... these are your assertions... so find for us (all of us amused by this) where the Treasury took only the two line items you named and explicitly said those line items alone are the reasons for that year’s fiscal deficit.

We are *still* waiting...

OMG, this is amazing, SS and Medicare are Entitlements, Debt service is interest expense.

FY 2018 Federal Budget: Enacted Versus Trump's Budget Request

Then go to BEA.gov and look at revenue and expenses to see what revenue was collected by tax source, FIT, Corporate, FICA, EXCISE. Do a little work and stop letting the left make a fool out of you

 

[OrphanSlug]

OMG, this is amazing, SS and Medicare are Entitlements, Debt service is interest expense.

FY 2018 Federal Budget: Enacted Versus Trump's Budget Request

Then go to BEA.gov and look at revenue and expenses to see what revenue was collected by tax source, FIT, Corporate, FICA, EXCISE. Do a little work and stop letting the left make a fool out of you

Now it is time to be harsh.

No where on that link did they sever out only two line items from the budget and say those two items are the exclusive reason for deficits (which is what you contend in case you forgot.) No where in that article did they deny how a unified budget works or when they have to rely on debt auctions to deal with this.

On that link, that you provided (and I’ve already read predicting you would use it,) they explain the real reason for the deficit for FY 2018.

“The FY 2018 deficit is projected at $779 billion once the Omnibus spending bill is included. It's almost double the $440 billion that Trump originally budgeted. One reason for the discrepancy is that revenue came in $100 billion less than expected. The other is that spending was $4.109 trillion, almost $100 billion more than budgeted.”

“The deficit was the fifth highest U.S. deficit by year. It made Trump the third highest deficit by president, following Obama and Bush. The CBO projects that the Congressional budget deal could boost the deficit to $1.2 trillion in FY 2019.”

Now... why is this the case?

Even that link stipulates that “interest payments on the national debt are not officially part of the mandatory budget, but the payments must be made. The budget office estimates it will be $325 billion in FY 2018. It's $62 billion more than 2017 because both the debt and interest rates are rising.”

*But* at no time do they blame that as the sole reason for the deficit, even that link realizes that we have a unified budget and even Trump’s proposal was inaccurate. Even when calculating revenue sources those funds do not go into independent accounts and spent as such, you can pretend otherwise but you would be lying to yourself.

It further says that “Republicans” raised defense spending above the increases stipulated from sequestration, and stipulates that “Democrats” added to the fun in spending as well. Again, making deficit spending something very bipartisan no matter what idiocy you come up with next. Spending in various departments went up, the article confirms it, and you have literally **** to say about it as your beloved Republicans got in on the action.

And to top things off, that link (that again, for those paying attention, you provided) goes into the impacts of Trump and Republicans tax cuts did to revenues. Twice in that link mentioning that revenue was less than expected mentioning once what the costs to debt over the next 10 years will be.

The reality is Trump and Republicans cut revenues at a time where the economy did not suggest that was needed, and it went right to deficits because overall spending needs went up. Does not matter what Trump submitted as he signed off on the effects anyway.

No matter what you select next to blame all this on, our budget course was on a track where deficits were going down (you even admitted this and why.) But hell no, Trump and Republicans changed course and we have increased deficits. They get to own that no matter what ideological bull**** you come up with next trying to blame “liberals,” the Fed, or anyone else.

Quit passing the buck and realize even your link suggests Trump is now in a class of his own when it comes to deficits approaching Bush and Obama both. The difference is Bush started a couple of wars and Obama inherited an economy in free fall. Trump on the other hand got an economy slowly improving and decided to hand a gift to the rich that went no further.

Congrats...

 

[Conservative]

Now it is time to be harsh.

No where on that link did they sever out only two line items from the budget and say those two items are the exclusive reason for deficits (which is what you contend in case you forgot.) No where in that article did they deny how a unified budget works or when they have to rely on debt auctions to deal with this.

On that link, that you provided (and I’ve already read predicting you would use it,) they explain the real reason for the deficit for FY 2018.

“The FY 2018 deficit is projected at $779 billion once the Omnibus spending bill is included. It's almost double the $440 billion that Trump originally budgeted. One reason for the discrepancy is that revenue came in $100 billion less than expected. The other is that spending was $4.109 trillion, almost $100 billion more than budgeted.”

“The deficit was the fifth highest U.S. deficit by year. It made Trump the third highest deficit by president, following Obama and Bush. The CBO projects that the Congressional budget deal could boost the deficit to $1.2 trillion in FY 2019.”

Now... why is this the case?

Even that link stipulates that “interest payments on the national debt are not officially part of the mandatory budget, but the payments must be made. The budget office estimates it will be $325 billion in FY 2018. It's $62 billion more than 2017 because both the debt and interest rates are rising.”

*But* at no time do they blame that as the sole reason for the deficit, even that link realizes that we have a unified budget and even Trump’s proposal was inaccurate. Even when calculating revenue sources those funds do not go into independent accounts and spent as such, you can pretend otherwise but you would be lying to yourself.

It further says that “Republicans” raised defense spending above the increases stipulated from sequestration, and stipulates that “Democrats” added to the fun in spending as well. Again, making deficit spending something very bipartisan no matter what idiocy you come up with next. Spending in various departments went up, the article confirms it, and you have literally **** to say about it as your beloved Republicans got in on the action.

And to top things off, that link (that again, for those paying attention, you provided) goes into the impacts of Trump and Republicans tax cuts did to revenues. Twice in that link mentioning that revenue was less than expected mentioning once what the costs to debt over the next 10 years will be.

The reality is Trump and Republicans cut revenues at a time where the economy did not suggest that was needed, and it went right to deficits because overall spending needs went up. Does not matter what Trump submitted as he signed off on the effects anyway.

No matter what you select next to blame all this on, our budget course was on a track where deficits were going down (you even admitted this and why.) But hell no, Trump and Republicans changed course and we have increased deficits. They get to own that no matter what ideological bull**** you come up with next trying to blame “liberals,” the Fed, or anyone else.

Quit passing the buck and realize even your link suggests Trump is now in a class of his own when it comes to deficits approaching Bush and Obama both. The difference is Bush started a couple of wars and Obama inherited an economy in free fall. Trump on the other hand got an economy slowly improving and decided to hand a gift to the rich that went no further.

Congrats...

some people are so brainwashed and indoctrinated that they are a waste of time. The love and respect for Obama is like a cult.

 

[OrphanSlug]

some people are so brainwashed and indoctrinated that they are a waste of time. The love and respect for Obama is like a cult.

More avoidance...

Now back to the assertion that you made. Where is that link to a Treasury report where they took the two line items out of the budget and said they were the only reason for the deficit as you claimed?

We are still waiting...

 

[Conservative]

You can cut and paste “-FIT” all you want and it still does not mean what you want it to mean.

Again... find for me where the Treasury cut out only the two line items you named and explicitly said these are the only two budget items that caused a deficit.

I am still waiting for that...

Now (and again for the umpteenth time) the “Trump Budget” is rather meaningless when Congress did what it did anyway with budget matters. Any budget submitted by a President still has to go through Congress, I would think someone who claims to know so much would know that. And to be honest with you Trump did not do all that much about what Congress did anyway so long as he got his tax cuts, at the time Republican controlled.

Do you know the difference between discretionary and mandatory budget items? Do you have any idea what the discretionary budget was for 2018 and how much was spent in that discretionary budget?

Treasury shows FIT and Corporate Tax revenue was 1.8 trillion dollars, check the link I gave you showing the requested budget and actual budget then tell me that the discretionary budget which is the only thing Trump controls caused the deficit?? The link shows that 1.2 trillion dollars was approved by Congress and spent for the discretionary spending. Again you prove that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the budget

 

[OrphanSlug]

Do you know the difference between discretionary and mandatory budget items? Do you have any idea what the discretionary budget was for 2018 and how much was spent in that discretionary budget?

Treasury shows FIT and Corporate Tax revenue was 1.8 trillion dollars, check the link I gave you showing the requested budget and actual budget then tell me that the discretionary budget which is the only thing Trump controls caused the deficit?? The link shows that 1.2 trillion dollars was approved by Congress and spent for the discretionary spending. Again you prove that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the budget

Where is that Treasury report claiming what you do?

 

[Conservative]

Where is that Treasury report claiming what you do?

Why aren't you questioning the data the left gives you like you do when challenged?

Apps Test | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

Government revenue and expenses Report 3.2 Federal revenue and expenses

 

[Conservative]

Why aren't you questioning the data the left gives you like you do when challenged?

Apps Test | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)

Report 3.2 Federal Revenue and expenses

 

[Conservative]

Where is that Treasury report claiming what you do?

Gave you the budget, gave you the Treasury report on revenue from FIT and Corporate taxes showing FIT 1.6 trillion and Corporate 160 billion for a total of almost 1.8 Trillion dollars. Discretionary spending in 2018 was 1.2 trillion dollars leaving 600 billion more in FIT and Corporate than those revenue items were to pay for. You have been so quick to respond when you believed you were right and now you are doing what most liberals do, run when proven wrong and not mature enough to admit when wrong. Discretionary and Mandatory spending make up the budget and revenue comes from various sources. Mandatory spending is mostly SS and Medicare which is funded by FICA, Payroll taxes. Discretionary spending is funded by FIT and Corporate taxes so you tell me now what line items made up the 2018 deficit?????? Apologize and show some maturity

 

[marke]

I think it is far more dangerous to see any nation increase deficits and debt at a time when the economy is doing better, that is contrary to every principle of economics known. Yet, Trump and Republicans in Congress decided to do so anyway.

Your answer is that Trump and republicans are bad. That is a common democrat mantra. But is it bad for America not to be paying down its debt? Can you possibly say either "Yes" or "No?"

 

[MTAtech]

some people are so brainwashed and indoctrinated that they are a waste of time. The love and respect for Obama is like a cult.

Inconvenient facts are indeed inconvenient. He was literally quoting your document in post #478 and you dismiss it as brainwashing. You should be brainwashed by facts and you'd be better off.

The thing to take away is that revenues were overestimated. The tax-cut did reduce revenue. This is beyond what I've been arguing also, that the tax-cut not only reduced revenue but shifted taxes: lowering them on corporations and the wealthy, while raising them on individuals in blue states that have lost their property tax deduction.

 

[MTAtech]

Your answer is that Trump and republicans are bad. That is a common democrat mantra. But is it bad for America not to be paying down its debt? Can you possibly say either "Yes" or "No?"

First, I see nothing here to conclude that America is paying down its debt. It's increasing it under Republican government.

Second, when a political party does things which are bad for its citizens we can conclude that the political party is bad. In this case, the GOP accelerated the growth of the debt at a time of low unemployment and gave tax-cuts to the rich and corporations -- inventing fallacious arguments to what the benefits would be -- none of which materialized.

 

[marke]

First, I see nothing here to conclude that America is paying down its debt. It's increasing it under Republican government.

Second, when a political party does things which are bad for its citizens we can conclude that the political party is bad. In this case, the GOP accelerated the growth of the debt at a time of low unemployment and gave tax-cuts to the rich and corporations -- inventing fallacious arguments to what the benefits would be -- none of which materialized.

Republicans bad... give breaks to the rich...Trump should be impeached...Trump is racist...Trump's supporters are evil...and so forth. Putting that aside, do you think the US is headed for serious fiscal trouble because it is not paying down its debt? Can we expect one of the oncoming presidential candidates to become focused on that fact at some point, or will no candidate ever look at the issue seriously?

 

[MTAtech]

Republicans bad... give breaks to the rich...Trump should be impeached...Trump is racist...Trump's supporters are evil...and so forth. Putting that aside, do you think the US is headed for serious fiscal trouble because it is not paying down its debt? Can we expect one of the oncoming presidential candidates to become focused on that fact at some point, or will no candidate ever look at the issue seriously?

If one listened to Republicans all through the Obama Presidency, debt was the major problem to them. Since they took power there hasn’t been a peep out of them about debt. Funny how that works.

 

[marke]

If one listened to Republicans all through the Obama Presidency, debt was the major problem to them. Since they took power there hasn’t been a peep out of them about debt. Funny how that works.

All joking aside, am I to understand that you secretly agree that refusing to pay down the US debt will have very bad consequences as time goes on?

 

[MTAtech]

If

All joking aside, am I to understand that you secretly agree that refusing to pay down the US debt will have very bad consequences as time goes on?

I think that adding to the debt in large amounts reduced the ability to respond when a crisis arises. Now, we are adding to debt beyond economic growth and asking the Fed to lower interest rates.

I believe that it’s fine to run a deficit if that deficit is lower than economic growth, as a p% of GDP.

 

[Conservative]

Inconvenient facts are indeed inconvenient. He was literally quoting your document in post #478 and you dismiss it as brainwashing. You should be brainwashed by facts and you'd be better off.

The thing to take away is that revenues were overestimated. The tax-cut did reduce revenue. This is beyond what I've been arguing also, that the tax-cut not only reduced revenue but shifted taxes: lowering them on corporations and the wealthy, while raising them on individuals in blue states that have lost their property tax deduction.

And you and he both continue to ignore the official treasury data from the link I gave you. What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty? Are you working for the Democratic Party? The tax cuts stimulated economic activity like they always have and that is what created the 1.8 trillion in revenue to pay for the 1.2 trillion in discretionary spending.

Now you finally admit the problem blue states losing their entire high state and local taxes as a deduction from their federal return. Finally you are seeing that liberalism isn't free and it is about time red states with lower state and local taxes stopped subsidizing your federal tax liabilities.

 

[Conservative]

If one listened to Republicans all through the Obama Presidency, debt was the major problem to them. Since they took power there hasn’t been a peep out of them about debt. Funny how that works.

Debt was part of the problem but more important return on the investment of the debt created was the real problem, 9.3 trillion added to the debt to get the results we got is a disaster.

 

[Conservative]

If
I think that adding to the debt in large amounts reduced the ability to respond when a crisis arises. Now, we are adding to debt beyond economic growth and asking the Fed to lower interest rates.

I believe that it’s fine to run a deficit if that deficit is lower than economic growth, as a p% of GDP.

Why is it that percentage change remains the issue for you?? Got it, because you believe it shows that the Trump economy is failing when the reality is the dollar growth is incredible as is the job creation over 2 1/2 million Americans working December 2018 vs. December 2017. I sure hope your party adopts your belief that we need to raise taxes and runs on that issue.

 

[MTAtech]

Why is it that percentage change remains the issue for you?? Got it, because you believe it shows that the Trump economy is failing when the reality is the dollar growth is incredible as is the job creation over 2 1/2 million Americans working December 2018 vs. December 2017. I sure hope your party adopts your belief that we need to raise taxes and runs on that issue.

Once again,you get it 100% wrong. My point is that if the deficit is kept below economic growth, as a p% of GDP, the debt becomes increasingly less significant over time compared to GDP.

Let's look at the World War II debt of 120% of GDP in 1948. How did we pay off that debt? Well, we didn't. That huge debt was never paid off but because the economy was growing fast, the $200 billion in debt became insignificant as GDP grew.

I know you are fixated with defending the Trump economy but everything aint about Trump. This is just math.

 

[Conservative]

Once again,you get it 100% wrong. My point is that if the deficit is kept below economic growth, as a p% of GDP, the debt becomes increasingly less significant over time compared to GDP.

Let's look at the World War II debt of 120% of GDP in 1948. How did we pay off that debt? Well, we didn't. That huge debt was never paid off but because the economy was growing fast, the $200 billion in debt became insignificant as GDP grew.

I know you are fixated with defending the Trump economy but everything aint about Trump. This is just math.

Your point is deficits don't matter when it is a Democrat in the WH spending in the name of compassion but it is a problem when the deficits are created because of previous debt measured in debt service and rising entitlement spending all of which has been explained to you and ignored

 

[OrphanSlug]

Your answer is that Trump and republicans are bad. That is a common democrat mantra. But is it bad for America not to be paying down its debt? Can you possibly say either "Yes" or "No?"

My answer is unchanged. Trump and Republicans added to deficits and debt at a time when the economy did not need that, and as such you are attempting to sidestep that discussion to talk about paying down debt.

Ironically deficits should go down and perhaps to the point of not needing to auction so much debt at this point of the economic cycle. If Trump and Republicans in the last Congress were really fiscal conservatives that would have been the move, we would see deficits continue to fall. Stress on Total Debt would be far less, but that is not what Trump wanted and what we ended up with was an increase in deficits and as such we are still breaking a few treasury auctions along the way.

A simple “yes” or “no” to your question ignores the fundamentals of economics, what fiat money systems are, the reality that the government is an active participant in our economy, and the very nature of fiscal and monetary policy decision making as a whole.

Try your game on someone else, it only makes you look foolish to try it with me.

 

[Conservative]

My answer is unchanged. Trump and Republicans added to deficits and debt at a time when the economy did not need that, and as such you are attempting to sidestep that discussion to talk about paying down debt.

Ironically deficits should go down and perhaps to the point of not needing to auction so much debt at this point of the economic cycle. If Trump and Republicans in the last Congress were really fiscal conservatives that would have been the move, we would see deficits continue to fall. Stress on Total Debt would be far less, but that is not what Trump wanted and what we ended up with was an increase in deficits and as such we are still breaking a few treasury auctions along the way.

A simple “yes” or “no” to your question ignores the fundamentals of economics, what fiat money systems are, the reality that the government is an active participant in our economy, and the very nature of fiscal and monetary policy decision making as a whole.

Try your game on someone else, it only makes you look foolish to try it with me.

Republicans also allowed the taxpayers to keep more of what they earn and that has stimulated the economic activity that created 2.9 million more people employed in December 2018 vs. December 2017. You have no understanding as to the components of GDP or even the taxes you pay or their purpose still refusing to apologize for being wrong about the line items in the deficit and the reality that trillions have been "stolen" from SS and Medicare that was never repaid.

the real issue continues to be your lack of understanding of the budget, the line items in the budget and even of basic civics as to how the budget process works. Further you want to be believe what the left tells you and believe that spending in the name of compassion is the answer to all our problems and can be generated by raising taxes on the rich

 

[Riverside]

Republicans also allowed the taxpayers to keep more of what they earn....

HORSEHOCKEY.

They haven't kept more of what they earned, they just took it from their children and grandchildren.