Republicans once railed against deficits. President Trump's tax plan piles on more than $2 trillion

[Perotista]

Its not the truth. Its only the "truth" to people who want to believe "both sides do it" as an excuse to continue to vote republican. See above. There simply is no "both sides do it" concerning deficits. Republicans and the conservative media had conservatives foaming at the mouth that deficits would destroy America. You didn't give democrats credit for lowering the deficit because "they didn't talk about it". Now you sit quietly and 'la de da, both sides do it" as republicans are going to pass tax cuts. You're simply looking for any excuse to not give democrats credit and not hold republicans accountable.

In deficit spending, both the administration and congress must go along with it. A president can't sign a budget into law until congress passes it.

Reagan added using rounded figures 1.9 trillion to the debt, he did so with the blessings of a Democratic controlled House and speaker Tip O'Neal. Both sides.
Bush I added 1.5 trillion to the national debt and did so with the Democrats controlling both chambers of congress. The Democratic congress had to give their blessing for that to happen.
Bill Clinton added 1.4 trillion to the national debt, 2 years of Democratic controlled congress, 6 years of Republican control of congress. Again both sides added to it.
Bush II added 4.7 trillion to the national debt, the first 6 years he had a Republican congress, the last two, a Democratic congress.
Obama added 9.3 trillion to the national debt, the first two years with a Democratic congress. The next four with the house under Republicans and the senate under Democrats and the last two with Republicans in full control of the congress.

Both sides.

 

[trouble13]

I tend to agree. But I think we can reduce federal government spending by 50% and end up with a better federal government. Nobody is working on spending less. The establishment are cowards and power hungry incompetents.

That should be the target reduction and they dont even try to incrimentally work toward it

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[Vern]

In deficit spending, both the administration and congress must go along with it. A president can't sign a budget into law until congress passes it.

Reagan added using rounded figures 1.9 trillion to the debt, he did so with the blessings of a Democratic controlled House and speaker Tip O'Neal. Both sides.
Bush I added 1.5 trillion to the national debt and did so with the Democrats controlling both chambers of congress. The Democratic congress had to give their blessing for that to happen.
Bill Clinton added 1.4 trillion to the national debt, 2 years of Democratic controlled congress, 6 years of Republican control of congress. Again both sides added to it.
Bush II added 4.7 trillion to the national debt, the first 6 years he had a Republican congress, the last two, a Democratic congress.
Obama added 9.3 trillion to the national debt, the first two years with a Democratic congress. The next four with the house under Republicans and the senate under Democrats and the last two with Republicans in full control of the congress.

Both sides.

But only one side had you foaming at the mouth that deficits would destroy America. So both sides don't do it. And not only did Bush add 6 trillion he left the massive trillion dollar bush deficits for President Obama to fix. anyhoo, here's Bush's 6 trillion and Bush inherited a surplus which makes him doubling the national debt even more impressive.

09/30/2009 __ 11,909,829,003,511.75____ end of Bush’s last budget
09/30/2008 __ 10,024,724,896,912.49___start FY 2009
09/30/2007 __ 9,007,653,372,262.48___
09/30/2006 __ 8,506,973,899,215.23___
09/30/2005 __ 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 __ 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 __ 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 __ 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 __ 5,807,463,412,200.06____FY 2002 start of Bush’s first budget

but thanks again for showing you will do whatever it takes to not hold republicans accountable.

 

[Perotista]

But only one side had you foaming at the mouth that deficits would destroy America. So both sides don't do it. And not only did Bush add 6 trillion he left the massive trillion dollar bush deficits for President Obama to fix. anyhoo, here's Bush's 6 trillion and Bush inherited a surplus which makes him doubling the national debt even more impressive.

09/30/2009 __ 11,909,829,003,511.75____ end of Bush’s last budget
09/30/2008 __ 10,024,724,896,912.49___start FY 2009
09/30/2007 __ 9,007,653,372,262.48___
09/30/2006 __ 8,506,973,899,215.23___
09/30/2005 __ 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 __ 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 __ 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 __ 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 __ 5,807,463,412,200.06____FY 2002 start of Bush’s first budget

but thanks again for showing you will do whatever it takes to not hold republicans accountable.

Too partisan for my blood. Have a nice day.

 

[countryboy]

I'll answer your pointless deflecting question. It depends. Now I've answered your question, answer mine. How do you rationalize your conservative masters having you foaming at the mouth about deficits the last 8 years and even in the worst recession since the depression, the Great Bush Recession, and now literally say "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, we're in power, let cut taxes and run up the deficits again"?

That's not an answer to a yes or no question. Either deficits are bad, or they're not. It doesn't "depend". This is nothing more than left wing hypocrisy. Yes, I know, a redundant term.

 

[rocket88]

Rocket, I'm still not seeing the "deficit hawk" part you claim democrats are when republicans are in power. Bush promised to balance the budget. He did the opposite. President Obama tweaked him for doubling the national debt. "deficit hawks" told people we needed to cut spending in the worst recession since the depression, the Great Bush Recession. They also told us that the stimulus would cause "hyper inflation, dollar collapse, market to zero". And now the "deficit hawks" are fine with tax cuts which everybody except conservatives know will drive up deficits. That's something to be mocked.

It is something to be mocked. Everybody loves deficits when their guy is doing it.

 

[fmw]

That should be the target reduction and they dont even try to incrimentally work toward it

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

It is why I have lost complete confidence in federal government and I've quit voting. Voting fixes nothing. Government fixes nothing. I hate to sit here complaining but, frankly, I can't do anything about it other than adapt. What I want from government - less - is not what everyone else wants. I lose.

 

[trouble13]

It is why I have lost complete confidence in federal government and I've quit voting. Voting fixes nothing. Government fixes nothing. I hate to sit here complaining but, frankly, I can't do anything about it other than adapt. What I want from government - less - is not what everyone else wants. I lose.

I empathize with your dilemma. I'm in it too. That's why I support all tax cuts. Spend away kiddies but find someone else's pocket to live in. It's also why I'm a huge fan of repealing the 16th amendment and switching to a consumption tax. At least that gives people the ability to control how much taxes they pay by controlling their spending.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[Yes_Minister]

It is why I have lost complete confidence in federal government and I've quit voting. Voting fixes nothing. Government fixes nothing. I hate to sit here complaining but, frankly, I can't do anything about it other than adapt. What I want from government - less - is not what everyone else wants. I lose.

Yeah, well guess what, living in a society is a compromise and sometimes people will support things you don't like, being free is not the same as getting your way all the time.

None of this changes the fact that this GOP "deficit hawk" stuff is a shell game, a talking point rather then a policy.

 

[barb012]

The government already collects 50% of our total income in Federal, State & local taxes. Irresponsible spending created their deficit and they should be responsible for fixing it without affecting all of us.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Congressional Republicans have no working idea how to replace the lost revenue of the proposed Trump tax cuts.

Their Hail Mary prayer .... Trumps tax cuts will compel the economy to increase by 5-6% annually.

:rofl

 

[trouble13]

Yeah, well guess what, living in a society is a compromise and sometimes people will support things you don't like, being free is not the same as getting your way all the time.

None of this changes the fact that this GOP "deficit hawk" stuff is a shell game, a talking point rather then a policy.

Your right we don't always get our way and have to tolerate things that others want. That is why I'm bothered by politicians who pick and choose which laws they will or will not enforce.

Trust me when I tell you nobody on the right is under the illusion that the GOP leadership are deficit hawks. They saw that betrayal under bush and turned their back on the party. That is how the DNC captured a suoermajority congress. When we saw what a disaster that was we started to primary out members of the GOP and gave trump the WH. The wing is a party in reform.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[trouble13]

Congressional Republicans have no working idea how to replace the lost revenue of the proposed Trump tax cuts.

Their Hail Mary prayer .... Trumps tax cuts will compel the economy to increase by 5-6% annually.

:rofl

They don't need to replace any of it. They need to cut spending. The electorate is weeding the spenders out.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[Exquisitor]

Rocket, I'm still not seeing the "deficit hawk" part you claim democrats are when republicans are in power. Bush promised to balance the budget. He did the opposite. President Obama tweaked him for doubling the national debt. "deficit hawks" told people we needed to cut spending in the worst recession since the depression, the Great Bush Recession. They also told us that the stimulus would cause "hyper inflation, dollar collapse, market to zero". And now the "deficit hawks" are fine with tax cuts which everybody except conservatives know will drive up deficits. That's something to be mocked.

I'll answer your pointless deflecting question. It depends. Now I've answered your question, answer mine. How do you rationalize your conservative masters having you foaming at the mouth about deficits the last 8 years and even in the worst recession since the depression, the Great Bush Recession, and now literally say "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeee, we're in power, let cut taxes and run up the deficits again"?

Tax cut won't just raise the deficit, it will set up another crash which is good for those with cash assets; the top beneficiaries of the tax cuts.

With a little more stimulus spending we would have cut off the need for more deficit spending by the Obama administration.

Also a highways bill, a raise in the minimum wage, other filibustered measures and proper care of Obamacare would have us nicely situated now.

Are you going to hold the Republicans responsible for what they did after wasting the Clinton boom and surplus and handing over the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression?

 

[Yes_Minister]

Your right we don't always get our way and have to tolerate things that others want. That is why I'm bothered by politicians who pick and choose which laws they will or will not enforce.

Trust me when I tell you nobody on the right is under the illusion that the GOP leadership are deficit hawks. They saw that betrayal under bush and turned their back on the party. That is how the DNC captured a suoermajority congress. When we saw what a disaster that was we started to primary out members of the GOP and gave trump the WH. The wing is a party in reform.

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

You never have real debt reduction, if you have giant tax cuts that are not budgeted in and massive military spending. Really the fastest way to reduce debt is to raise taxes and cut spending, but no one likes that.

 

[trouble13]

You never have real debt reduction, if you have giant tax cuts that are not budgeted in and massive military spending. Really the fastest way to reduce debt is to raise taxes and cut spending, but no one likes that.

I would support a dollar for dollar tax hike and spending cut policy if they proposed it. I have no desire to pass my generations debts to my children as my parents did to me. But neither party is interested in doing that. They are all drunk on the money. The only thing I know to do is support tax cuts and let them figure out how to keep spending with less money coming in. Eventually it's gonna collapse

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[APB212]

America will eventually bankrupt itself, if it doesn't split up over Trump first.

 

[Oborosen]

Haven't you noticed? Deficits are only bad when the president is a Democrat.

Don't be asinine, deficits are always bad. No matter who is in office.

 

[Oborosen]

Both parties are good at being deficit hawks...when it's not their guy in the WH.

Unfortunately you are one of the only posters on DP that I have seen call that out, and you are completely correct in that assumption.

I like to think in part that since Dems had the house for so long, we got used to them getting **** on. Now that its a repub in the WH.. who strangely isn't really a republican in the first place. We just have to get acclimated to this stupidity all over again.

 

[Vern]

Unfortunately you are one of the only posters on DP that I have seen call that out, and you are completely correct in that assumption.

I like to think in part that since Dems had the house for so long, we got used to them getting **** on. Now that its a repub in the WH.. who strangely isn't really a republican in the first place. We just have to get acclimated to this stupidity all over again.

O, help me see what you see for you to think "both parties are good at being deficit hawks when not in power". I've never seen dems calling for spending cuts in the worst recession since the depression. I didn't see dems flip flop on stimulus spending when a republican was in the WH. I haven't seen democrats whipping their base into a frenzy that the national debt will destroy us all. I've never seen democrats purposely try to sabotage the economy driving deficits up. I haven't seen a steady stream of bills from democrats to balance the budget. I'm just not seeing the "deficit hawk" narrative you see. what is it that you see? sure the Dems are just more prudent when it comes to the budget. the fact that the deficits went down under President Clinton and President Obama proves that. I just don't see being better with money as a "deficit hawk". Are sure this isn't just some easy narrative to cling to so you can continue to vote republican?

 

[Oborosen]

O, help me see what you see for you to think "both parties are good at being deficit hawks when not in power". I've never seen dems calling for spending cuts in the worst recession since the depression. I didn't see dems flip flop on stimulus spending when a republican was in the WH. I haven't seen democrats whipping their base into a frenzy that the national debt will destroy us all. I've never seen democrats purposely try to sabotage the economy driving deficits up. I haven't seen a steady stream of bills from democrats to balance the budget. I'm just not seeing the "deficit hawk" narrative you see. what is it that you see? sure the Dems are just more prudent when it comes to the budget. the fact that the deficits went down under President Clinton and President Obama proves that. I just don't see being better with money as a "deficit hawk". Are sure this isn't just some easy narrative to cling to so you can continue to vote republican?

They have done just as much as the Reps, during their control of the seat, and out of that control. Besides if you don't know that the national dept/deficit is something that is completely grounded in reality at this point. Though I really don't care how much ol Obama increased our Debt, because at this point its an inconsequential number. Every president we have is going to just build more debt due to how broken the system is in its current form.

He raised our debt by over 8 Trillion and while he kept blaming Bush for the nations deficit, that guy was only responsible for the first year of Obama's term. The rest was on Berry's shoulders, and no one else.

Every party has used the deficit to get a one up on the other. Its like school yard bragging rights, or to be more associated to hazing tactics then that.

 

[jonny5]

Full Title: Republicans once railed against deficits. Now President Trump's tax plan piles on more than $2 trillion in red ink

---

5-6% economic growth per year would be so astounding that virtually all economists discount it entirely. So the question remains ... How can we afford the Trump tax cuts?

On Capitol Hill, GOP Representatives and Senators shrug their shoulders and ignore the $2 trillion dollar question. They need a legislative-political win today ... regardless of the cost to future generations.

2 trillion is fake news. There is no legislation yet, so any numbers are based on wild assumption. But its moot anyway. There is nothing to afford. Tax cuts are not spending. The real question is how can we afford the 3.5 trillion in spending, put there by various presidents and congresses including this one (though mostly FDR).

 

[jonny5]

You never have real debt reduction, if you have giant tax cuts that are not budgeted in and massive military spending. Really the fastest way to reduce debt is to raise taxes and cut spending, but no one likes that.

Raising taxes doesnt work either. You end up slowing growth which results in a marginal increase in revenue. The proven way to balance the budget is to do nothing. That worked in the 90s, and almost in the 00s before the recession. It even worked under Obama. In all cases, the rate of spending growth slowed down allowing the economy to catch up. Military spending isnt even the problem. We take in more than enough revenue to pay for the military (700bn). The real problem is the 2.5 trillion in social programs which have doubled while military spending has decreased.

Social Security- 900bn
Healthcare - 1.2 trillion
Welfare - 300bn

Today, spending on Social Security and the major
health care programs constitutes 54 percent of all
federal noninterest spending, more than the average
of 37 percent over the past 50 years. If current laws
generally stayed the same, that figure would increase
to 67 percent by 2047

 

[MTAtech]

Trying to call this hypocrisy is intentionally not understanding timeframe matters. When the economy was rolling along kind of nicely in 2007, talking about deficits was warranted. When in the middle of a near-depression, government is supposed to deficit spend. I stop when the light is red and go when it is green. That's not hypocrisy.

 

[MTAtech]

Raising taxes doesnt work either. You end up slowing growth which results in a marginal increase in revenue
...

The historical record isn't on your side. Clinton raised taxes and both the economy and revenue grew. Bush cut taxes and revenue shrank with no dramatic change in GDP growth. Obama raised taxes and GDP grew the same as before the tax-increases and revenue increased too.