It's the debt ceiling again!

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by wgabrie, Feb 26, 2023.

  1. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I did answer your fuzzy math question. For starters, the difference between current revenue projections and spending. If we assume spending is constant and the TCJA was passed, all conventional estimates showed that the projected deficit and debt would increase between $1 to $2 trillion dollars over a period of ten years, assuming inflation on 2018 levels remain constant. That will tell you that the revenue is decreased, mainly from corporate income taxes while not significantly increasing GDP growth.

    The CBO model uses today's inflation, spending, and revenue projection to come up with the numbers for reducing spending if the JCTA is reversed with the overall goal of a 26% baseline reduction in 2022 levels of government spending across the board on all federal expenditures, discretionary and nondiscretionary. The CBO report then looks at the numbers if we protect certain programs starting with Medicare, then adding SS, discretionary Defense Spending, and eventually VA benefits. I have provided these links in the past and will do one more time just for you. Also keep in mind that no broad based tax cuts pay for themselves. That is a popular myth among conservatives who are not astute at budgetary analysis, which is pretty moch, well, you know who you are. Not the Reagan Tax Cuts, not the Bush Tax Cuts, and definitely not the Trump tax cuts.

    Current deficit project increases when JCTA was passed

    https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-did-tcja-affect-federal-budget-outlook

    https://www.crfb.org/papers/tax-cuts-dont-pay-themselves

    The CBO paper on how to truly solve the debt and deficit wihtout politics getting involved.

    https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-03/58984-spendings.pdf

    Yes, politically it is impossible because neither side will pass these types of cuts and will not repeal the JCTA, but if you read the report, you get a general idea that although the debt may be daunting, we have both a revenue and spending problem. Spending is necessary at the federal level. The key questions are to whom and where
     
  2. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,988
    Likes Received:
    3,837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fuzzy math indeed, but that description only applies to your claim, certainly not mine. Your original statement was ...

    "You either have to solve the deficit and debt, or you don't. The easiest way is a 29% cut across the board, all programs, both Democrat and Republican, along with the elimination of the Trump Tax Cuts, and an increase in a recession, the growing pains of solving the debt and defict. It is 56% across the board if you want to keep the Trump tax cuts in play."




    ...Your solution above is how to get the budget in balance in year 1. In order to do that, your prescription is to have a 29% across the board tax cut. That statement is correct, and I have no issue with it. Where I disagree is where you claim that if we want to keep the Trump tax cut, then in order to bring the budget in balance in year 1, we would need to cut spending by 56%.

    Since you are talking about bringing the budget in balance in year 1, if a 29% across the board decrease brings the budget into balance in year 1, and in order to keep the Trump Tax cut while bringing the budget into balance in year 1 we would need to have a 56% across the board tax cut, that means that the Trump tax cut would have to be equal to 27% of all federal spending which is OBVIOUSLY incorrect.

    Nothing that you suggested above supports this claim, or even remotely addresses your initial claim.

    If you must see this in numerical terms..

    In 2022 , federal spending was 4.7 Trillion. Revenue was 3.38
    US Federal Budgetary Spending by Year – Polidiotic

    OK.....For starters, 2022 revenue is WITH the Trump tax cuts. If we cut spending across the board 29% that is 1.363 Trillion and when subtracted from the 4.7 trillion spending number that comes out to 3.337 Trillion which does in fact bring our budget in order to the 3.38 number above. On this claim as I stated above, we are both in agreement.

    It is the second claim where we disagree. You said that in order to bring it into balance in year 1 we need to cut spending by 56% instead of the 29%. Not only are the Trump tax cuts already included in the number above which required a 29% reduction to get the budget in balance, but even if that is not enough to prove your claim as undeniably incorrect we can still look at the numbers that you are suggesting. In that instance you would look at reducing the 4.7 trillion spending number down to 2.068 trillion, while the revenue number stays the same since it already includes the Trump tax cut. So in that instance we would have a budget surplus of 1.3 trillion. Obviously we do not need a surplus of 1.3trillion in order to get the budget in order.

    I think it is likely that you saw a 10 year CBO projection of a Trump tax cut, and then mistakenly took that ten year number and mistakenly put all of it into year 1. I was polite to you about this and simply attempted to point out your obvious mistake. Instead of acknowledging that mistake, you have opted to gaslight instead.

    Which brings me to the statement I have repeated several times because you keep answering everything other than what I have said.

    "I believe that whatever you have read that you clearly have mistaken its meaning because there is not a snowballs chance in hell that Trumps tax cuts reduced government revenue by an amount that is equal to 27% of government spending in year 1 which is what you are referring to when saying we need a 56% reduction in spending to balance the budget. I could understand perhaps a 10 year projection of a decrease in combination with taking it to year 1 that perhaps such a claim could be made. If it is a 10 year projection, you would then need only an additional 2.7% reduction in spending rather than 27%. That would perhaps be a believable statement. There would still be an argument to be made in regard to the stimulatory effects of a tax cut, but at least the claimed 2.7% number would make sense. 27% does not."
     
    Last edited: Apr 24, 2023
  3. Quantum Nerd

    Quantum Nerd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2014
    Messages:
    18,024
    Likes Received:
    23,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here is the problem, for the people inclined in math:

    $1.3 trillion deficit is 5.6% of the $23 trillion economy. What happens if you take away 5.6%? Yes, instant recession. People may not think about this, but the government spending goes into many peoples' pockets, who then spend it back into the economy. The fact is that since more than a decade, small, positive GDP growth was bought through government deficits, yes, even during the "magical" Trump economy.

    Now, the question is: Does the House GOP want to force the US into a recession by taking away government spending, with the single objective of regaining full power in 2024? One could be cynical, but to me it looks like that's exactly what they are trying to do.
     
    Alwayssa likes this.
  4. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Total nonsense.
    If you don't stop making up positions for me, I'm going to call you out for personal attacks.
    The education in poor neighborhoods is lousy. Don't blame the students.
    You're going to blame teachers for what they don't control?
    Unions are for workers who want them, the public sector included.
    What makes you think unions are more corrupt than employers, public and private?
    Unions have been burned to right-to-work laws. Nearly half of nonunion workers would join at their work if they could.
    Your comments about unions, the economy, women, abortion, Trump,
     
    Quantum Nerd likes this.
  5. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do they want a recession if they can get the public to blame it on Democrats? Are they hoping to get the Democrats to blink? Do they want to cut spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security?

    I wonder how that squares with Trump's ads saying he'll preserve Social Security and Medicare.
     
    Quantum Nerd likes this.
  6. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I was thinking about how a debt default by the US government would lead to the price of debt increasing costing the government more to borrow money.

    That might lead to a new crisis where we have to address the perverse system where the ones who are least able to pay have to pay the most to borrow money.
     
  7. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I agree it was nonsense.

    Teachers and the unions control local education so yes blame them and then blame the social attitudes of the people living there who do not believe the free public education is something that they should attain.

    As I noted in the private sector where they want it which is a slim percentage. As I noted FDR and I will add George Meany past president of the AFL-CIO and former Mayor LaGuardia all gave the reasons unions were NOT meant for government sector workers as the relation between employer and employees is vastly different.

    The history of them both.

    Not a shred of evidence to support the recent unions vote show exactly the opposite. If everyone wants unions the right-to-work laws would have no effect on union membership.


    I said specifically, what have I said that you are disputing about the economy.
     
  8. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm sure school management and school boards will be happy to hear they're sock puppets for teachers. Some states operate without teachers' unions.
    All three long dead. Employees want unions and are blocked from having them by anti-union right-to-work laws, violating workers' basic rights of free association. It's no surprise you're attacking unions.
    Naïve, IMO.
    Well, start here.
     
    Last edited: Apr 25, 2023
  9. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Not many do and are you really denying the political power the teachers unions exert?

    Strawman what the said is just as true today as then and we see it when teachers and other public unions go on strike or make their high demands and then provide the money and votes for the person who grants them.

    What is naïve about it. Right to work laws do not BAN unions or tell people they are not allowed to form one and if successful to belong to it.

    What is here?
     
  10. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It is more likely the percentage decrease of Government spending assuming that state and local government spending, consumer spending, and investment spending remain the same. So, it will be much higher than total GDP.

    Government spending, federally, is around 25%. Take $1.3 trillion dollar deficit cut of 25%, or a reduction of 15% or so of 25% and it is much worse in terms of dollars.
     
    Quantum Nerd likes this.
  11. Alwayssa

    Alwayssa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Messages:
    32,956
    Likes Received:
    7,587
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You did not read the link. The CBO was a request by Dems of what it will take to reduce the debt and deficit to $0 in 10 years. That is not the JCTA projection for CBO. The projection in additional deficits was done by another law budgetary firm that uses CBO projections, and even those projections show a decrease in revenues by the broad-based tax cuts. You are hit with a double whammy here and did not realize it.
     
  12. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Teachers' political power is based on persuasion.
    They have every right to quit (go on strike) and refuse to come back to work until everyone is rehired. You don't need a union.
    "High demands?" :)

    Teachers don't need a union to go this route.
    We've been over this before.
    IMG_2192.jpeg
     
  13. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    It is based on power to hold the taxpayer hostage, their political donations and shear numbers.

    No they do not have a right to go on strike and hold the tax payers hostage because they hold the monopoly on those education funds and yes can go on strike and force more and more money into their own pockets.
     
  14. FAW

    FAW Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2008
    Messages:
    12,988
    Likes Received:
    3,837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You just keep responding to a subject that is not being discussed and then pretend as if you have just proven something. I keep pointing out that your 29% reduction to balance the budget if we eliminate the Trump Tax cut, and 56% if we keep it is utter nonsense. You keep replying by saying that the Trump tax cuts show a decrease in revenue, as if I am somehow arguing that in the CBO projection that it does not show a reduction in revenue which is most certainly NOT what I am saying. You keep arguing against a point that I have not raised. I know full well that the CBO does NOT take into account any sort of stimulatory effect from various tax policies, so I know full well that they will show any tax cut as decreasing revenue. Please stop acting as if my argument is that the CBO shows anything other than a reduction in revenue. My argument is that you are WAY overstating what ANYONE claims that decrease to be.

    Since you now want to base this all on your CBO link for a 10 year projection, how about you simply cut and paste the part where you think it supports your claim that it requires a 29% reduction in spending if we eliminate the Trump tax cut, and 56% if we don't. I just read it cover to cover, and nowhere do I see anything that even remotely supports that idea.

    Show your math. Do SOMETHING to support your statement. If your math comes from more than one link than show where you got your figures from a different link. When it is all said and done, your math does NOT compute. Not even close.

    When you claim....
    "You either have to solve the deficit and debt, or you don't. The easiest way is a 29% cut across the board, all programs, both Democrat and Republican, along with the elimination of the Trump Tax Cuts, and an increase in a recession, the growing pains of solving the debt and defict. It is 56% across the board if you want to keep the Trump tax cuts in play."

    ...You are in essence claiming that the Trump tax cuts almost cut revenues in half. Your claim is nonsensical and wholly unsupportable. Somewhere along the line you have confused yourself by misunderstanding SOMETHING that you have read. The only question is what it is that confused you.
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2023
  15. LangleyMan

    LangleyMan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2017
    Messages:
    44,677
    Likes Received:
    12,448
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Numbers and donations, yes. They don't win support by striking.
    You can replace them if they quit (strike). Kwitchyurbellyachin" about it.
    Teachers don't control education spending. That's absurd.
    So, replace them. Stop telling them they can't quit.

    upload_2023-4-26_8-39-21.jpeg upload_2023-4-26_8-40-23.jpeg

    https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/best-states-for-teachers
     
    Alwayssa likes this.
  16. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,325
    Likes Received:
    38,994
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    They don't need the support nor seek the support of the parents and taxpayers they have political power over the politicians and control the huge public school system to which parents are REQUIRED to send they children unless they can afford private schooling.

    Not without going through a long and oderous process with the thousands of kids locked out of the schools.

    Teachers have HUGE political influence over that spending and to deny such is TOTALLY absurd.
     
  17. Zorro

    Zorro Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    76,423
    Likes Received:
    51,236
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Kevin McCarthy Basks in Win After Republicans Unite to Pass Debt Ceiling Plan.

    Seems like a lot of winning!

    House Republicans have succeeded in passing their proposal to both raise the debt limit by $1.5T in exchange for small reasonable reductions in spending. With a budget that is currently $1.3T a year out of balance, they only asked for a $0.5T annual reduction in spending.

    Joe Biden refuses to negotiate and threatens to destroy the US economy, destroy the US credit rating, and cut off Social Security checks for the aged and infirm if his Red Ink Orgy is hampered in any way. Hopefully the Democrat held Senate can talk some sense to the crazed illegitimate 80 year old.

    [​IMG]

    A small step toward sanity.
     
  18. Space_Time

    Space_Time Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    12,421
    Likes Received:
    1,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which is your preferred way out of the debt crisis:
     
  19. Space_Time

    Space_Time Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    12,421
    Likes Received:
    1,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which scenario do you think is the most likely:
     
  20. Space_Time

    Space_Time Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    12,421
    Likes Received:
    1,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Is anyone else getting nervous?
     
  21. Independent4ever

    Independent4ever Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2020
    Messages:
    3,542
    Likes Received:
    3,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Odds of a resolution have been low from day 1. Biden should have started the negotiations months ago and McCarthy is under too much pressure to effectively compromise to any deal that the Dems would agree to. Too many on both sides want the default to happen - gotta score those political points for 2024

    The economic death spiral of the US is about to be accelerated
     
  22. fmw

    fmw Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2009
    Messages:
    37,758
    Likes Received:
    14,562
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The greatest problem facing the nation currently is federal government itself. Somebody has to get it under control. I can't do it for you. Perhaps the freedom caucus can help a little.
     
  23. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I am. I got out of treasury bonds. I cashed them out before the default, just in case.
     
  24. Space_Time

    Space_Time Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    12,421
    Likes Received:
    1,965
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Somehow I'm not optimistic:
     
  25. Lee Atwater

    Lee Atwater Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2017
    Messages:
    45,403
    Likes Received:
    26,531
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Fitch, the bond rating company, has put the United States' AAA rating on negative watch thanks to the economic terrorism of the Repubs.
     

Share This Page