- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: National debt tops $22 trillion for the first time as experts warn of ripple effects
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:08 am to Taxing Authority
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:08 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
You’re still wrong.
0
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:12 am to ShortyRob
quote:
LOL. What?
New ON TOP of current is most certainly NOT splitting hairs.
Dude, Rs are spending "on top" of prior spending too. They're just spending it differently. Did you see this and last year's budget?
This concept that Rs spend less than Ds has no empirical data behind it. The only thing that reduces spending is gridlock.
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 11:13 am
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:14 am to cahoots
quote:I'm sorry. Not differentiating between automatic escalators and totally new spending ideas that are MASSIVE is just silly.
Dude, Rs are spending "on top" of prior spending too
The Dem position on student loans alone would fricking swallow it all.
quote:Yeah.
Did you see this and last year's budget?
Tell me. Other than military spending, name 1 friggin dollar the Dems weren't going to spend too.
So. Back to original point.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:14 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Well. If BOTH sides basically haven't the guts to stop current spending and ONE side not only hasn't the guts to do that, BUT WANTS TO PILE ON, that's a pretty big fricking difference!
Does the omnibus trump signed not count as piling on?
That's not automatic bro
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 11:15 am
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:15 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Yeah.
Tell me. Other than military spending, name 1 friggin dollar the Dems weren't going to spend too.
So. Back to original point.
Other than the biggest and most bloated department
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:16 am to cahoots
quote:
Rs are spending "on top" of prior spending too
y/y growth rates on that quarterly govt expenditure figure:
we see a crisis/recession spike, followed by a pretty steep slowdown to well below what is a typical rate of growth over the last few decades and even a slight decline in some quarters (thanks boehner and ryan!)
nice ramp-up in the last year or two, too. this is all in nominal terms
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 11:18 am
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:19 am to cahoots
quote:
This concept that Rs spend less than Ds has no empirical data behind it. The only thing that reduces spending is gridlock.
This is false. Even if nothing is done with the budget, then the automatic budget increased add between 5-6% to the previous year's budget. Rinse and repeat, year after year.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:21 am to cahoots
quote:Well, three things.
Other than the biggest and most bloated department
1. liberals who think bloat in the military is unique to the military and not systemic in the govt on the whole display their gross ignorant.
2. Thanks for agreeing with me. That's the ONLY think liberals want to touch.
3. Total military spending could be reduced to zero and it would not pay for the NEW ideas Democrats have for spending.
The end
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:22 am to wickowick
quote:Liberals know this.
This is false. Even if nothing is done with the budget, then the automatic budget increased add between 5-6% to the previous year's budget. Rinse and repeat, year after year.
Hell, the DEMAND it.
Then, they fake stupidity.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:24 am to Maytheporkbewithyou
quote:
we need open borders
quote:
spending cuts and lowering the debt.
You're right. We should build a great wall. That'll cut spending and lower the debt. Better yet, let's give corporations a tax break. That'll help the debt also
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 11:25 am
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:27 am to Taxing Authority
quote:
every one of those years were under Obama.
2005 and 2006 were under Obama? Lol. You should try reading the entire post before commenting. Also, Obama inherited a war. This isn't exactly new information. Sorry to ruin your gotcha attempt
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:30 am to ShortyRob
quote:
1. liberals who think bloat in the military is unique to the military and not systemic in the govt on the whole display their gross ignorant.
It's not unique but it epitomizes government bloat and Republican hypocrisy. You can't talk fiscal responsibility and then increase the largest budget.
quote:
3. Total military spending could be reduced to zero and it would not pay for the NEW ideas Democrats have for spending.
Imagine if we actually cut every single liberal program from the budget. What do you think happens next? Hint: the military will get more money.
The only way we're getting to better fiscal responsibility is if we actually have a bipartisan way to legislate it. It's going to be exploited otherwise. It's not hard to see.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:33 am to Ebbandflow
I would also like to point out that the democrats took control of Congress in 2006.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:35 am to cahoots
quote:
It's not unique but it epitomizes government bloat and Republican hypocrisy. You can't talk fiscal responsibility and then increase the largest budget.
You think we are blaming only the democrats, most of us in this thread put the blame at both parties, but before fixing the problem, you need to understand the problem.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:37 am to wickowick
quote:
I would also like to point out that the democrats took control of Congress in 2006.
Think of how we would be doing if we correctly taxed offshore money, didn't have a 20 year long War, and didn't make a gigantic tax cut for corporations in the United States. Pretty sure it's more than a drop in the bucket
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:40 am to Ebbandflow
quote:Your inability to understand the regressive nature of corporate taxes is a constant reminder of your economic ignorance and a reminder that you're being duped by the very people you think you're screwing.
Better yet, let's give corporations a tax break.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:42 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
Think of how we would be doing if we correctly taxed offshore money, didn't have a 20 year long War, and didn't make a gigantic tax cut for corporations in the United States. Pretty sure it's more than a drop in the bucket
For the past 70+ years, the US tax receipts average out to about 18.5%. Taxing more doesn't increase the percent and taxing less doesn't either. If you want to increase tax receipts you have to grow the GDP. It isn't rocket science.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:42 am to cahoots
quote:You do realize the military budget isn't the Fed's largest budget, right?
It's not unique but it epitomizes government bloat and Republican hypocrisy. You can't talk fiscal responsibility and then increase the largest budget.
It's the largest of the DISCRETIONARY spending.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:54 am to ShortyRob
Yes it’s the largest discretionary. However you slice it, it is a big piece of the pie.
Posted on 2/13/19 at 11:56 am to wickowick
quote:
For the past 70+ years, the US tax receipts average out to about 18.5%. Taxing more doesn't increase the percent and taxing less doesn't either. If you want to increase tax receipts you have to grow the GDP. It isn't rocket science.
Averaged out, yes, but they have fluctuated. Even a 1% swing is significant. 1% of $20 trillion in GDP is $200 billion. Over 5 years, that’s a trillion. You can’t say that tax rates don’t affect collections meaningfully.
A small percentage of a big number is still a lot.
This post was edited on 2/13/19 at 11:57 am
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News