If it goes down this way, then Trump could be overseeing even higher spending levels than Obama.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

Quote:t was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — President Donald Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.

No doubt the tax cut factors into the increased borrowing. Will the tax cut promote enough spending to offset the tax cut in the way of GDP growth? We'll see.

(02-04-2018 08:27 PM)miko33 Wrote:  If it goes down this way, then Trump could be overseeing even higher spending levels than Obama.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...story.html

Quote:t was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — President Donald Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.

No doubt the tax cut factors into the increased borrowing. Will the tax cut promote enough spending to offset the tax cut in the way of GDP growth? We'll see.

I believe the number I saw was that the treasury takes in about a trillion dollars for every percent of GPD increase. If we see 3%-4% GPD this year, that would cover that.

Also, the amount of taxes Apple is paying to repatriot some money is about 3% of that total amount. So I have little doubt that the revenue will be there to offset.

Trump spending higher than Obama was going to be a given.

Difference is Obama was trying to give health coverage to people and take us out of the biggest economic collapse since the depression.

Trump well he is just less....... he needed to repay donors throughnthevAmerican treasury.

We are in for a **** storm eventually.

If China stops buying our debt. Look out below

Borrowing a trillion dollars with an expanding economy. You guys have lost your damn minds. What’s really crazy. You think these tax cuts will be a selling point! They will be with Fox News so you won’t lose your base. Everybody else? They will see.

(02-05-2018 08:29 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Trump spending higher than Obama was going to be a given.
Difference is Obama was trying to give health coverage to people and take us out of the biggest economic collapse since the depression.
Trump well he is just less....... he needed to repay donors throughnthevAmerican treasury.
We are in for a **** storm eventually.
If China stops buying our debt. Look out below

If China stops buying our debt, then we stop defending their oil supply. Thanks to fracking, we are now in a position to do that.

(02-05-2018 08:32 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Borrowing a trillion dollars with an expanding economy. You guys have lost your damn minds. What’s really crazy. You think these tax cuts will be a selling point! They will be with Fox News so you won’t lose your base. Everybody else? They will see.

Umm, we are borrowing ten trillion without these cuts, eleven trillion with. It's not the tax cuts that are the problem, it's the other ten trillion.

Tremendous deficits were always a given.

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.

But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.

But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

Damn President Obama and his financial crash.

(02-05-2018 09:59 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.
But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

Damn President Obama and his financial crash.

Well, let's see, the crash supposedly ended in 2009. But the deficits continued. Why?

(02-05-2018 09:59 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.

But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

Damn President Obama and his financial crash.

Technically, it was Pelosi & Reid. All Obama did was to ensure his wall st buddies didnt suffer prison time.

Umm, we are borrowing ten trillion without these cuts, eleven trillion with. It's not the tax cuts that are the problem, it's the other ten trillion.


?????????

No.............................Where in the world do you get this?????????

Who high jacked Owl 69's account?????????????????? This is getting as bad as UofM.

(02-05-2018 10:25 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Umm, we are borrowing ten trillion without these cuts, eleven trillion with. It's not the tax cuts that are the problem, it's the other ten trillion.
?????????
No.............................Where in the world do you get this?????????
Who high jacked Owl 69's account?????????????????? This is getting as bad as UofM.

Have you looked at the outyear forecasts in the proposed budget?

Here are CBO's forecasts.

https://www.cbo.gov/about/products/budge...mic-data#3

As of January 2017 their forecast was $9.427 trillion for 2018-2017.

(02-05-2018 10:19 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:59 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.
But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

Damn President Obama and his financial crash.

Well, let's see, the crash supposedly ended in 2009. But the deficits continued. Why?

Largely because revenues hovered around 15% of GDP until 2012. It took 4 years to get revenues and subsequent spending up/ back down to their customary levels of 18 to 20% of gdp.

Owl. Our debt is 20 trillion + our deficit is 895 billion. neither of those numbers are 10 trillion. That's why I asked you where you were getting your numbers. Now where are you getting 10 trillion borrowed???????????

(02-05-2018 09:22 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 08:32 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Borrowing a trillion dollars with an expanding economy. You guys have lost your damn minds. What’s really crazy. You think these tax cuts will be a selling point! They will be with Fox News so you won’t lose your base. Everybody else? They will see.

Umm, we are borrowing ten trillion without these cuts, eleven trillion with. It's not the tax cuts that are the problem, it's the other ten trillion.

meh, facts, who needs them...

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

with just about any administration in the last 10 years, just sayin...

(02-05-2018 10:43 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Owl. Our debt is 20 trillion + our deficit is 895 billion. neither of those numbers are 10 trillion. That's why I asked you where you were getting your numbers. Now where are you getting 10 trillion borrowed???????????

Simple, because the $1.5 trillion alleged revenue reduction from the tax cut is a 10 year number. Take your $895 billion deficit number (your number) and multiply it by 10 and you get $8.95 trillion. And the deficit is projected to grow. In January 2017, CBO said $9.427 trillion by 2027. That's pretty much $10 trillion, right?

You have to compare apples to apples.

(02-05-2018 10:37 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 10:19 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:59 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:47 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(02-05-2018 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Tremendous deficits were always a given.

Not until 2009.
But there won't be any reduction until politicians grow a pair. The only way out that I see is a consumption tax. Even at a very low rate, a consumption tax will raise massive revenues. It must be introduced only when accompanied by massive reduction or elimination of income taxes.

Damn President Obama and his financial crash.

Well, let's see, the crash supposedly ended in 2009. But the deficits continued. Why?

Largely because revenues hovered around 15% of GDP until 2012. It took 4 years to get revenues and subsequent spending up/ back down to their customary levels of 18 to 20% of gdp.

Which corresponds to the republicans taking back the house.

Destroying America. Sad.