Where is Trump's Balanced Budget?

[wellwisher]

Any time you cut taxes, you cut revenue somewhere.

The difference between the private sector and Government is the private sector creates wealth; GNP, while the Government creates deficits. For example, if you get $100 back as a tax cut, you can put it in the bank at 2% interest. The money just grew. If you give the government the same money, is worth less due to waste and redundancy. The value of $100 goes down. The Government is like a leaky bucket, the more it has, the faster it leaks.

The main problem is the Government is led by people who are elected, based on popularity, but not on money managing skills. No business could survive with this three stooges model of leadership, since it is a leaky bucket. For example, what would happen to Apple or IBM if its leadership was elected based on partisan politics, mud slinging and popularity? Both companies would got into bankruptcy in one year. In the private sector, the ship is much tighter and leadership is based on practical merit, so companies can make profit; grow the economy and GNP.

Another consideration has to do with spending your own money, versus spending someone else's money. Say you had an expense account that someone else pays, versus having to spend your own money. Which is easier to spend on frivolous things? Which will you keep better track of? Obama gave Iran over $Billion in cash that was not his. This made him look important. How much of his own money did he kick in? This is why Government will never turn a profit to help create value for the economy.

A lot of waste is connected to donors and campaign donations. A large campaign donation is often used to direct Government resources in someone's favor. A politicians who, for example supported electric cars, gets a donation in exchange for wasting tax dollars. The math is not good for the country, but even at pennies to the dollar, it still benefits the politicians.

The budget is never balanced, because the leadership is clueless since it lacks the collective skills to make this happen. Trump has the skills needed to grow the money, but power is such that the morons set the stage for deficits due tp promises to donors. The less money we give the morons the better the country is.

This mistake the left makes is looking at the smaller picture. They see the Government giving freebies. This still adds to pennies on the dollar in terms of value. This is not optimized for the bigger picture, due to the many wasteful reasons cited.

 

[Conservative]

How much is tax revenue up? If you factor for inflation, how much of the revenue growth is left? I know inflation is a difficult subject for you to stomach.

Why does it matter, tax revenue is UP but your desire is for the federal govt. always to have growing revenue to do what you believe your state cannot do. We don't need a 4.4 trillion dollar federal govt. taking money out of the state and local coffers. Inflation isn't the problem your understanding of the role of the federal govt. is as it is only taxpayers that need to go on a diet and federal revenue has to always grow

Federal Income tax revenue UP, Excise Tax revenue UP, FICA revenue UP, State sales and property tax revenue UP. Official data is something you will never understand and your focus will always be on funding that expensive bureaucratic nanny statea govt. your ideology supports. Nothing independent about you

 

[Dittohead not!]

Not when the economic activity occurs like it has the last year. There is a reason tax revenue is up, explain it?

If tax revenue is up despite the tax cuts, it's due to the continued growth of the economy.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Doing away with the Bill of Rights is not good for the country. To hell with those who want the 2nd amendment done away with.

I'm not sure what the Second Amendment has to do with balancing the budget.

 

[Dittohead not!]

The difference between the private sector and Government is the private sector creates wealth; GNP, while the Government creates deficits. For example, if you get $100 back as a tax cut, you can put it in the bank at 2% interest. The money just grew. If you give the government the same money, is worth less due to waste and redundancy. The value of $100 goes down. The Government is like a leaky bucket, the more it has, the faster it leaks.

The main problem is the Government is led by people who are elected, based on popularity, but not on money managing skills. No business could survive with this three stooges model of leadership, since it is a leaky bucket. For example, what would happen to Apple or IBM if its leadership was elected based on partisan politics, mud slinging and popularity? Both companies would got into bankruptcy in one year. In the private sector, the ship is much tighter and leadership is based on practical merit, so companies can make profit; grow the economy and GNP.

Another consideration has to do with spending your own money, versus spending someone else's money. Say you had an expense account that someone else pays, versus having to spend your own money. Which is easier to spend on frivolous things? Which will you keep better track of? Obama gave Iran over $Billion in cash that was not his. This made him look important. How much of his own money did he kick in? This is why Government will never turn a profit to help create value for the economy.

A lot of waste is connected to donors and campaign donations. A large campaign donation is often used to direct Government resources in someone's favor. A politicians who, for example supported electric cars, gets a donation in exchange for wasting tax dollars. The math is not good for the country, but even at pennies to the dollar, it still benefits the politicians.

The budget is never balanced, because the leadership is clueless since it lacks the collective skills to make this happen. Trump has the skills needed to grow the money, but power is such that the morons set the stage for deficits due tp promises to donors. The less money we give the morons the better the country is.

This mistake the left makes is looking at the smaller picture. They see the Government giving freebies. This still adds to pennies on the dollar in terms of value. This is not optimized for the bigger picture, due to the many wasteful reasons cited.

You make a good case for cutting back the size of government. Unfortunately, it's not just the "left," meaning I suppose Democrats, who are big government statists. The only disagreement is not over whether to spend the tax money and then some, but on what.

As for those billions Obama "gave" to Iran, no, that wasn't his money. It wasn't taxpayer money, either. That was Iran's money to start with.

But, it did give the opposition a meme to use: "Look! Obama is giving our money away to Iran!"

 

[Conservative]

If tax revenue is up despite the tax cuts, it's due to the continued growth of the economy.

Continued growth? You mean like the 1.2% GDP growth first qtr. 2017 or the last six quarters of Obama 1.5%? Learn the components of GDP and learn how tax cuts benefit the largest component?

 

[Dittohead not!]

Continued growth? You mean like the 1.2% GDP growth first qtr. 2017 or the last six quarters of Obama 1.5%? Learn the components of GDP and learn how tax cuts benefit the largest component?

Continued growth, starting from the depths of the recession. If you think the economy began to grow, or to grow faster due to the tax cuts, then show how it took a jump right after they went into effect. Otherwise, what you're promoting is simply voodoo economics and wishful thinking.

 

[Conservative]

Continued growth, starting from the depths of the recession. If you think the economy began to grow, or to grow faster due to the tax cuts, then show how it took a jump right after they went into effect. Otherwise, what you're promoting is simply voodoo economics and wishful thinking.

Continued growth? I guess anything positive is growth but coming off what the left called the worst recession since the Great Depression not achieving 3% growth, adding 9.3 trillion to the debt isn't what I would call a success.

Still having addressed the components of GDP and how tax cuts affect them. Keep diverting

 

[Dittohead not!]

Continued growth? I guess anything positive is growth but coming off what the left called the worst recession since the Great Depression not achieving 3% growth, adding 9.3 trillion to the debt isn't what I would call a success.

Still having addressed the components of GDP and how tax cuts affect them. Keep diverting

and resuming the trillion dollar plus deficits after the need for economic stimulus has passed isn't what I'd call a success either, particularly when the president has promised a balanced budget.

 

[Conservative]

and resuming the trillion dollar plus deficits after the need for economic stimulus has passed isn't what I'd call a success either, particularly when the president has promised a balanced budget.

Again, keep ignoring the revenue growth and economic activity being generated. Fact, we spend too much and there never have enough money to fund the liberal spending appetite. For some reason growing federal spending is more important than taxpayers growing their own bank account

 

[Dittohead not!]

Again, keep ignoring the revenue growth and economic activity being generated. Fact, we spend too much and there never have enough money to fund the liberal spending appetite. For some reason growing federal spending is more important than taxpayers growing their own bank account

Who's ignoring the revenue growth and economic activity being generated? I keep asking for evidence that said growth is actually because of the tax cuts. The first step would be to show that there is a correlation, i.e., economic growth accelerated right after the tax cuts went into effect. The second step, much more difficult, would be to show that there is a cause/effect relationship as well as a correlative one. so far, I haven't seen evidence of even the easier one.

 

[Conservative]

Who's ignoring the revenue growth and economic activity being generated? I keep asking for evidence that said growth is actually because of the tax cuts. The first step would be to show that there is a correlation, i.e., economic growth accelerated right after the tax cuts went into effect. The second step, much more difficult, would be to show that there is a cause/effect relationship as well as a correlative one. so far, I haven't seen evidence of even the easier one.

Good Lord, man this is ridiculous, what is the largest component of GDP??? That is the evidence, the more spendable income to the American taxpayer the more economic activity generate, Logic 101. Do you spend more when you pay higher taxes or when you have lower taxes thus more take home pay? You refuse to accept the evidence because that flies in the face of what you want to believe like most leftists, that the govt. is the answer and govt. spending is the key

 

[marke]

I'm not sure what the Second Amendment has to do with balancing the budget.

Very few politicians from either side of the aisle have any realistic idea how to balance the budget and help America recover from debt.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Good Lord, man this is ridiculous, what is the largest component of GDP??? That is the evidence, the more spendable income to the American taxpayer the more economic activity generate, Logic 101. Do you spend more when you pay higher taxes or when you have lower taxes thus more take home pay? You refuse to accept the evidence because that flies in the face of what you want to believe like most leftists, that the govt. is the answer and govt. spending is the key

Yes, the more spendable income Americans have, the greater the GDP. That's the basis of the percolate up theory of economics I've already described. As for the biggest component of the GDP:

Consumption is the largest component of the GDP. In the U.S., the largest and most stable component of consumption is services. Consumption is calculated by adding durable and non-durable goods and services expenditures. It is unaffected by the estimated value of imported goods.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) - QuickMBA

So, I'm not arguing against tax cuts, as long as they actually result in more money in the hands of the poor and middle class. But, if we're going to cut taxes, then we need to cut spending as well. The liberal big spenders don't seem to understand that when their leader proposes a tax cut.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Very few politicians from either side of the aisle have any realistic idea how to balance the budget and help America recover from debt.

This is true.

But it has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Not to be outdone with his HUSH money lies, Trump's lies of a balanced budget will affect us and our children for many years to come.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ional-debt-in-eight-years-good-luck-with-that

Donald Trump told the Washington Post he would get rid of the national debt “over a period of eight years.”

And it's worse than that. He not only isn't balancing the budget. He is skyrocketing the deficit, and it will soon pass the $1 Trillion threshhold.

View attachment 67242135

Republicans hold all three legislative branches of government. They need only look into a mirror if they want to see irresponsible fiscal policy.

You are right about that. The do nothing party combined with the resistance equals nothing done for the American people. Unless you count the spreading of hate for each other. That is one thing both parties excel at. Their great accomplishment is spreading hate and do nothing for the people. If I was Trump I would declare that I don't want to be associated with either pathetic party.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Good Lord, man this is ridiculous, what is the largest component of GDP??? That is the evidence, the more spendable income to the American taxpayer the more economic activity generate, Logic 101. Do you spend more when you pay higher taxes or when you have lower taxes thus more take home pay? You refuse to accept the evidence because that flies in the face of what you want to believe like most leftists, that the govt. is the answer and govt. spending is the key

Then why don't you use the GDP equation to demonstrate your point?

Oh, wait... I remember now. YOU CAN'T DO IT. You don't understand how.

Sad.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Very few politicians from either side of the aisle have any realistic idea how to balance the budget and help America recover from debt.

And you do?

What happens to GDP when you make deep cuts to government spending?

 

[marke]

And you do?

What happens to GDP when you make deep cuts to government spending?

What happens when cuts are not made to excessive spending? The bitter end comes. Inevitably.

 

[Conservative]

Then why don't you use the GDP equation to demonstrate your point?

Oh, wait... I remember now. YOU CAN'T DO IT. You don't understand how.

Sad.

Don't have to as BEA.gov does it for me. Treasury data

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative]

And you do?

What happens to GDP when you make deep cuts to government spending?

Not much at all we aren't Europe

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

What happens when cuts are not made to excessive spending? The bitter end comes. Inevitably.

Define "excessive," in this context. Then, answer the question.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Don't have to as BEA.gov does it for me. Treasury data

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

You have already demonstrated that you don't understand how to interpret the data that you so vaguely point to, so you don't have the goodwill of anybody on this board where you can just make claims and expect anybody to believe you. You, more than anybody else, need to do the work; cut and paste, bold the important numbers, and FRIGGIN' INTERPRET THEM CORRECTLY, FOR ONCE.

 

[JohnfrmClevelan]

Not much at all we aren't Europe

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

This would be a handy time for you to understand how the GDP equation works.

GDP = C + I + G + (X - M)

(Same equation holds in Europe, btw)

 

[Bullseye]

And you do?

What happens to GDP when you make deep cuts to government spending?

who cares. There's nothing magic about it. And if that government spending was left in the hands of the people who produced it there would probably be just as big a bump in GDP, if not more.