Federal deficit jumps 20 percent after tax cuts, spending bill

saltwn · #1 (**permalink**) 08-09-2018, 10:39 PM

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/40...-spending-bill

I haven't heard much on this. Anyone else seen or read about it

Quote:

The federal deficit jumped 20 percent in the first 10 months of the 2018 fiscal year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported Wednesday.

Quote:

Spending outpaced revenue between the beginning of the fiscal year, on Oct. 1, and July by $682 billion, $116 billion more than over the same period in the last fiscal year.

Quote:

The rising deficit is largely the result of the tax cuts President Trump signed into law at the end of last year, as well as a bipartisan agreement to boost spending, according to CBO.

Quote:

Tax revenues from individuals rose, even as revenues from corporate taxes dropped.

Quote:

The Trump administration has argued that the tax cuts would bring down the deficit, as economic growth led to higher tax revenue. The economy did expand in the second quarter by 4.1 percent.

Quote:

But economists have argued the growth would have to be much larger to reduce the deficit.

Quote:

The CBO projects that the deficit will reach $793 billion by the end of the year and approach $1 trillion next year. White House estimates have the deficit surpassing $1 trillion in 2019.

Quote:

Budget watchers have warned that interest payments — the amount the Treasury has to pay just to service the debt — are slated to become the fastest-growing annual expenditure.

Quote:

The CBO projects that in 30 years, the government will spend more on servicing debt than on Social Security or defense.

Republicans used to worry about this.

Obama worked hard at bringing it down as much as one could in the real economy of the time period.

cnredd · #2 (**permalink**) 08-09-2018, 11:07 PM

From earlier this year...

Trump signs $1.3 trillion spending bill, despite earlier threat to veto

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

HATE this spending bill...

When Dems are in control, the Republicans go on and on about how we need to reign in spending but those darn majority Democrats have the power...

...then When the Repubs are in control, they say they've just looooove to reign in spending, but they don't have a filibuster-proof majority, so those darn minority Dems have the power...

saltwn · #3 (**permalink**) 08-09-2018, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

From earlier this year...

Trump signs $1.3 trillion spending bill, despite earlier threat to veto

are you trying to say it's democrats fault trump and mitch made this tax bill?

Manitou · #4 (**permalink**) 08-10-2018, 02:24 AM

A tax cut means pigs need to cut out a lot of lard. The money isn't there, you see. It's not rocket science. Get rid of the damned lard bucket programs, people.

With apologies to real swine.

AZRWinger · #5 (**permalink**) 08-11-2018, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn

are you trying to say it's democrats fault trump and mitch made this tax bill?

Don't forget Paul Ryan is also to blame. All spending bills are supposed to originate in the House. Ryan cast his lot with go along, get along Republicans terrified of confronting the Democrat minority by copying Boehner's style of giving into Democrat demands for continuing the spending orgy.

Trump deserves criticism for signing off on the massive CR but at least he offered a plausible explanation, it had the funding needed to begin rebuilding a military ravaged by the previous administration's budget cuts.

Sadly it appears the Republican Congressional leadership is intent on saddling President Trump with a choice between shutting down the government on the eve of the midterm elections or signing another protest CR.

dancer · #6 (**permalink**) 12-19-2018, 02:30 PM

The people have needs. In a democracy we take care of the people. Clinton at least knew that when he raised taxes in the late 1990s and was on the road toward paying off the debt! He even had a surplus and projections were for a continuing surplus. The Congress was worried that the debt may be fully paid off in 2013 causing problems with the international trade situation. Then along came Bush in 2000 and his tax reductions that threw us into the largest debtor and deficit positions ever! Then Trump lowered taxes some more and now we have the largest deficit ever. Why is it that "spending" is all that conservatives look at? Revenue is most important. People have needs and we had better not forget that.

Also, the poor spend every dime they get in on consumption to boost the economy. When we lower taxes we give folks who save, and do not consume as much, more money. The economy and production of goods is consumption driven, not investor driven. Let's put the onus on the right part - the savers, not on the consumers - for the lackluster economy and quit making the situation worse.

saltwn · #7 (**permalink**) 12-19-2018, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dancer

The people have needs. In a democracy we take care of the people. Clinton at least knew that when he raised taxes in the late 1990s and was on the road toward paying off the debt! He even had a surplus and projections were for a continuing surplus. The Congress was worried that the debt may be fully paid off in 2013 causing problems with the international trade situation. Then along came Bush in 2000 and his tax reductions that threw us into the largest debtor and deficit positions ever! Then Trump lowered taxes some more and now we have the largest deficit ever. Why is it that "spending" is all that conservatives look at? Revenue is most important. People have needs and we had better not forget that.

Also, the poor spend every dime they get in on consumption to boost the economy. When we lower taxes we give folks who save, and do not consume as much, more money. The economy and production of goods is consumption driven, not investor driven. Let's put the onus on the right part - the savers, not on the consumers - for the lackluster economy and quit making the situation worse.

George H W Bush knew it when he sacrificed his career for the good of the country by his raising taxes after the 'read my lips' pledge.

saltwn · #8 (**permalink**) 12-19-2018, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

From earlier this year...

Trump signs $1.3 trillion spending bill, despite earlier threat to veto

I get your meaning on this post now. Don't know why I didn't before.

GetAClue · #9 (**permalink**) 12-20-2018, 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dancer

The people have needs. In a democracy we take care of the people. Clinton at least knew that when he raised taxes in the late 1990s and was on the road toward paying off the debt! He even had a surplus and projections were for a continuing surplus. The Congress was worried that the debt may be fully paid off in 2013 causing problems with the international trade situation. Then along came Bush in 2000 and his tax reductions that threw us into the largest debtor and deficit positions ever! Then Trump lowered taxes some more and now we have the largest deficit ever. Why is it that "spending" is all that conservatives look at? Revenue is most important. People have needs and we had better not forget that.

Also, the poor spend every dime they get in on consumption to boost the economy. When we lower taxes we give folks who save, and do not consume as much, more money. The economy and production of goods is consumption driven, not investor driven. Let's put the onus on the right part - the savers, not on the consumers - for the lackluster economy and quit making the situation worse.

Stopped reading right there.

1. We do not live in a Democracy; we live in a Representative Republic. There is a huge difference. A pure Democracy is essentially mob rule. Whatever the majority of people want, becomes the law. If that were the case, minorities would never receive a fair deal. We live in a Republic where the rule of law out weighs the rule of the majority ensuring that all people have equal rights.

2. The role of our government in our Republic is NOT to take care of people, but to provide a framework of Government that allows people to live without fear of government telling people how to live and how they should be forced to spend their monies. It is up to the people to take care of themselves. This system has worked for over 200 years and has formed the basis of a country that was founded by farmers into the most economically and militarily powerful country that he world has ever known. Why would anyone want to change that?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

The Following User Says Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
saltwn

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Manitou For This Useful Post:
AZRWinger, jimbo

The Following User Says Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:
GetAClue