- This topic is empty.
September 20, 2011 at 7:54 pm #600625
…and yes, the link above is to a liberal, progressive site, however, the charts themselves are from the Budget of the United States Government: Historical Tables Fiscal Year 2012. [http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy12/hist.html]September 20, 2011 at 8:03 pm #734903
All of the Obama drops in deficits and spending are in future years. Its BS logic and won’t happen. Now, trend what has happened in the last 3 years and its worse than Bush.
Nothing more than a democrat spin machine. Using goverment logic I can borrow $100k to buy a nice car today and offset it with future expenses.
Guess what, I am going to post a graph of my future income over the next ten years but I am going to include future income and expense cuts I haven’t made or received. Thats basically what these graphs do. Save them, then in 2015 lets look at what actually happens.September 20, 2011 at 8:39 pm #734904
O yea… I love those CBO scored reports… first.. congress says score this… BUT only use the parameters as we have outlined them. So CBO is worthless. Sadly, the only halfway clouded vision is hindsight… and so far.. Obama has spent in 3 years what GW spend in 8…. and neither one of them rates a merit badge. BTY… did ya note the source of the data? I checked, there is no such office…this is spin. I wish you would all just stick to liberal, or left wing… ain’t nothing “progressive” now many how times you say it or write it… it’s just liberalism, classic hand out politics.September 20, 2011 at 10:01 pm #734905
—No such office? kootchman, what the devil are you talking about? It’s the Government Printing Office, and it’s got a Web site with a bona fide .gov Web address. I followed the link funkie gave and found the data right away.
Go ahead and question the GPO’s accounting scheme if you want. But you can’t just claim that whatever the government says isn’t true and leave it at that, ‘cuz that’s a cop-out. Plus, it’s not fair to funkietoo, who is trying to make a polite, well-reasoned argument here.
(Thanks, funk!!!! Keep it up.)September 20, 2011 at 10:07 pm #734906
now, DP, don’t ya know that KMan doesn’t let facts get in the way of his “truth”?September 21, 2011 at 1:01 am #734907September 21, 2011 at 1:18 am #734908
those charts only go to 2013…
and the data for 2010 already happened…
nothing future about that.September 21, 2011 at 2:33 am #734909
Sorry its 2013, it looked like 2015 to me. To many years of looking at computers. My point still stands. If you look up to 2011 its up until after 2011. The drops come from 2011 to 2013. So, its based off nothing more than projections. Projections that I am betting take into account things like pulling out of Afganastan which I am sure won’t happen.
I have seen too many future projection graphs from the government to believe any of them. Show me what you take in for taxes and show me what you spend. These graphs will not turn into reality because they don’t take into account reality.September 21, 2011 at 1:43 pm #734910
bostonman: so what was all of the political bickering about cutting spending about? i could have sworn those guys in DC reached some sort of conclusion that cut spending… and if obama’s millionaire tax gets through, and if he keeps his word to end the wars, we could very well see those deficit reductions.
also note that bush’s TARP and obama’s “porkulus” are responsible for the biggest and most recent spikes in deficit numbers.
holy cow! it’s going to smart for you guys if obama and his economic team pull us out of tail spin and show some real tangible progress, ain’t it?September 21, 2011 at 3:21 pm #734911September 21, 2011 at 4:21 pm #734912
You know Redblack, I am only 39 but its not the first time I have heard that one. I hope he does pull us out of the recession and reduce the debt levels. None of my comments said I hope he doesn’t.
There are a lot of if’s in your statement though. Historically it doesn’t happen. I will acknowledge that if we aren’t fighting the wars it will reduce a lot of future spending but if he replaces that money spending with something else then he hasn’t really cut anything.September 22, 2011 at 3:14 am #734913
you are right about the budget deficit not heading south till after 2011.. but that’s when we pay for the current budget.. you know .. all those things congress authorizes…
it’s what we are obligated to pay…
you could say the first part of Obama’s deficit graph was paying off George W’s obligations.
As for the other two graphs.. you really should pull out your glasses and take a closer look.
the facts challenge what is now passing for common wisdom.September 22, 2011 at 2:34 pm #734914
bostonman: i’m about your age, and i’ve been watching supply-side economics reduce the middle class and its share of the nation’s wealth since 1983 or so.
note that republicans are profligate spenders, as well, and that most of the debt we’ve racked up in 30 years has been by reagan and bush 2.
but you’re right: nothing will happen if republicans continue to oppose any and every idea put forth by the administration – even after he’s agreed to meet them on their turf regarding spending cuts. the fact is that the minority party (and a handful of nutters on wall street) is controlling policy right now through its obstructionism, deceit, and manipulation.September 22, 2011 at 6:02 pm #734915
I enjoy a nice spirited conversation as much as the next guy. It becomes obvious though when you are talking to specific people they are only intent on blaming, not fixing and fixing only comes with the idea that every other idea is wrong. Republicans and Democrats both have their idea of what to do to fix the economy. Without the wars Good of George would have looked like he kept the debt in check and grew the economy. Without the wars Obama wouldn’t need to worry so mych about the debt.
Now, I am not ignorant to sit around and say that the Democrats ideas won’t work and that Republican ideas will like you are doing. I can admit that I think its a nice place in the middle. Unfortunatly I don’t think anyone will be able to get us there. Honestly I am less worried about the US economy right now and more worried abou the European market. Its the bigger threat right now.
So, while I support higher individual tax rates for high earning individuals I also support lower taxes for companies. At the same time I think we need to close the tax loopholes and reduce subsidies so that commodities can get back to a true market value. Be prepared for what that means though because $8 for a gallon of gas is likely. Who do you think that will hurt more? Me or the guy down the street making $20k a year?September 23, 2011 at 1:37 am #734916
that $8 gallon of gas will have to be combined with investment in public transportation or the retail businesses that are our only current economic fuel will be unable to employ those minimum wage college graduates who either have to live with mom or get food stamps to make it… not to mention the poor slob living down the street who is supporting a family on 20k.
you can’t have it both ways…
as for solutions..
i am all for the easy stuff.
fund infrastructure which will create more taxpayers which will raise revenue.
end the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy
and make all corporate tax breaks dependent upon local job creation…
if you must lower tax rates on businesses.. lower them for small businesses since they are the majority of our nation’s employers.
while i am at it…
if we must wage war.. and i sincerely wish we wouldn’t…
institute a draft
and stop paying subcontractors exorbitant rates to do the work the military and the corp of engineers used to do for itself.
war profiteering was once illegal.
and that’s just my short list…
i am a true economic conservative…
i believe in spending a penny now to save a pound later…
so i would invest in education
and in health care
and in housing
and in redemptive justice
we can afford all of them if we didn’t have to pay profit centers on top of profit centers for our nation’s health care for it’s sickest residents and for prison systems and …
I am sick of political he said she said…
as someone else posted to me today…
wouldn’t it be refreshing if our elected representatives were actually judged on their results instead of their advertising?
Democrats would fail as well as republicans
though not quite as manySeptember 23, 2011 at 4:40 am #734917September 23, 2011 at 5:22 am #734918
I agree, the only problem is which comes first? If gas goes up to $8/gallon tomorrow it would still take 4 years to get solid reliable public transportation in Seattle. That doesn’t even count how it would be addressed in rural areas. The effect on transportation would also be insane. Now. I can afford $8/gallon gas but when I got out of college I couldn’t so the government should be working on building that infrastructure now, not waiting until its too late.
In principle I think we are in same infield but maybe in different positions. But close.September 23, 2011 at 6:01 am #734919
and guess what? Pres. Obama’s jobs bill that Repubs are dismissing, did just that…it was about getting people back to work working on the infrastructure…not 5 years from now, but now. Sigh.September 23, 2011 at 1:32 pm #734920
bostonman: i agree with what you wrote – up to a point. what is irking us over here on the “left” is that we’ve tried supply-side economics for 30 years and it has done nothing but harm to the lower classes and our government. so why attempt more of it? why attempt to cut taxes further when empirical data shows that those policies have hurt the government’s ability to govern and caused chronically large deficits and debt?
again, you can’t deny that the explosion in deficit spending coincides with the reagan tax cuts – and tinkering with the social security trust fund.
democrats are saying – and have been since clinton left office – that the scales need to tip back toward increased revenue in order to balance the budget.
so now republicans have the tea party effectively dictating their party’s fiscal policy, and because of that and their intransigence, republicans can’t or won’t negotiate tax policy – or any other policy – with democrats.
i and other democrats are with you on spending cuts [edit: when it comes to waste and fraud, not necessarily “entitlements”] and corporate tax policy, though: close the loopholes, raise the effective tax rate, and then lower the statutory rate. right now, the statutory rate is 34%, the highest in the world; but the effective rate is only around 16% because of loopholes and deductions.
i am fully willing to meet in the middle on that one. say at 24%? [and provided that all of those taxes are paid.]
and can we agree that offshoring profits is a form of tax evasion? can we put a stop to it?September 23, 2011 at 2:50 pm #734921
“raise the effective tax rate, and then lower the statutory rate. right now, the statutory rate is 34%, the highest in the world; but the effective rate is only around 16% because of loopholes and deductions.”
the real tragedy is that the effective rate on small businesses who are actually employing workers is much higher than that because they have no lobby to create special tax breaks.
when we talk about main street we need to be concentrating on the small businesses that are driving our economy.
not to sound like a broken record :)
think global. buy local.
:)September 23, 2011 at 2:53 pm #734922
jo: well-said. i was talking macro-economics, but you’re right. that money on wall street should be flowing to and from main street, and governments should facilitate that ebb and flow. after all, main street is where wall street derives most of its wealth.September 23, 2011 at 2:59 pm #734923
the problem is that the radical right has labelled all common sense approaches to fiscal responsibility as liberal and therefore suspect.
Yes, i am a liberal. I am probably about as far left in my political philosophical outlook as anyone i know..
but when it comes to money, i am the conservative child of a child of the depression.
I firmly believe that only fools don’t spend every dollar they spend in the most effective manner possible.
I reuse, recycle and restore as a way of life…
not so much because i am an old leftist.. or hippy..
but because it makes total fiscal sense to me.
Hubby and I invested in our own educations
and are appalled that my children don’t place the same importance on their children’s education that we do.
We invest in our community
because no-one is successful in America without the public resources that gave us opportunity.
We invest in individuals
because helping just one person past the roadblocks that keep them from even limited success really does help others…
if only by giving them hope.
America was once a country that understood sacrificing for the greater good..
that understood that you must invest if you want returns..
i want that country back
not the one where winner takes all has become the favored motto…September 23, 2011 at 4:04 pm #734924
Obama had the first 2 years of office where he could have easily passed legislation to close some of the loopholes. Instead he spent too much time on healthcare. Now, if he had closed the loopholes and subsidies he might have a better economic picture to pass healthcare now.
The sooner people accept that no party is going to change the loopholes and subsidies the better off we all are. No matter who makes it into office they will play the blame game as to why they couldn’t get X W or Z done.September 23, 2011 at 5:25 pm #734925September 23, 2011 at 7:15 pm #734926
bostonman: so your advice is to just keep giving my tax dollars and my disposable income to bank of america, exxon, comcast, etc.? no hope? no change? no common ground?
you say we shouldn’t play the blame game, but you just blamed obama for not getting tax reform done when democrats controlled congress and the white house. and you blamed the ACA for our current budget woes.
as for closing tax loopholes, how about S-3816? proposed and passed by a democratic house, and killed by republican failure to invoke cloture, aka procedural filibuster (which only happened about 400 other times between 2006 and 2010 when democrats tried to put the smackdown on the corporatocracy.)
a summary of the bill:
This bill would give companies a two-year payroll tax holiday, reducing the amount of Social Security taxes they would have to pay, for new employees who replace workers doing similar jobs overseas. It also revokes provisions of the tax code that Democrats say encourage companies to outsource their work force.
i hope you’ll also remember that freezing the current tax structures was part of a bipartisan deal to extend unemployment insurance loans to the states.
man. every time i think i might be talking to a reasonable republican, he or she defaults to, “both parties stink. nothing’s going to change.”
the sooner you guys realize that big media and big money have us pitted against each other, the sooner we can take our government back from them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.