If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Josephwalker, Jul 27, 2018.

  1. k995

    k995 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The normal growth for 2018 was estimated at around 2.5% . If you want to pay for the tax cut you would need 6-7% or even higher growth to be able to pay for it.

    The problem with reducing taxes is that the more you reduce them the higher the growth needs to be before they pay for themselves.

    US gdp growth for 2018 so far was 3% last year it was 2.5% thats very far from whats needed.


    Yes obama also had such high Q but thats not sustainable without massive gov debt creation and massive deficit increases.
     
  2. k995

    k995 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And now its 21.3 billion meaning trump is adding debt just as fast as obama was.
     
  3. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Huh? That doesn't rebut my post at all.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
    ThorInc likes this.
  4. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    First you said we'd need 5 to 6% growth. Moving the goal post as I prove that is achievable?
     
  5. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You said Obama reduced the defecits and I proved you were seriously wrong.
     
  6. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For now but as results of the tax cuts and other trump policies take hold that will reverse.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  7. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You proved no such thing. All you proved is that you are seriously misinformed about federal government accounting.
     
  8. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So show me what accounting trick says Obama reduced the deficit by two thirds as you claimed.
     
  9. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What "trick"?

    Deficit:

    Year - "on-budget" - "total"
    2009 -1,549.7 -1,412.7
    2010 -1,371.4 -1,294.4
    2011 -1,366.8 -1,299.6
    2012 -1,148.9 -1,087.0
    2013 -719.0 -679.5
    2014 -514.1 -484.6
    2015 -465.8 -438.5
    2016 -620.2 -584.7

    https://www.cbo.gov/system/files?file=2018-06/51134-2018-04-historicalbudgetdata.xlsx
     
    ThorInc likes this.
  10. k995

    k995 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As I said 4% on top of the predicted growth.

    For 2018 that was 2.5% so 6.5%
    2019 2.7 so 6.7%
    2020 1.9 so 5.9%
    ...
    2023 1.3% do 5.3%


    SO no 1 Q 4% growth isnt enough, thats not eve close to enough.
    5% comes close, 6% will most years be enough but it can be as high as 6.7% .

    And no there is no way there will be 5 to 6% growth without increasing the deficit a lot more.
     
    ThorInc likes this.
  11. k995

    k995 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You actually think debt is going to shrink?

    CBO actually thinks deficit will increase to 1trillion next year and stay there (without changed policy) .
    They predicted 800+billion deficit this year (up from 440 when obama left office) and so far that seems to be spot on.
     
  12. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion

    Don't know how you spin that simple fact. Oh here's how. LOL

    "Let’s start with an important reminder: The deficit is not the same as the debt.

    A country’s deficit is the difference between what the government collects in revenues and spends in one year. The national debt, by contrast, is the accumulation of all annual deficits minus any annual surpluses."
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  13. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once again you seem to think debt and deficit are the same thing. You are either confused or trying to confuse others. Which is it?
     
  14. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fascinating, but I didn't say anything about the debt.

    I didn't spin it at all. I never said anything about the debt, but I proved to you my statement was accurate by linking directly to the source for budget data, the Congressional Budget Office.

    Of course. So why are you blathering about the debt when my statement was about deficits?

    That is true.

    And which is exactly what by data from the CBO shows.

    That is a general statement, but not necessarily accurate. The national debt is the accumulation of all the money it borrows. It's borrowing is not necessarily the same as the difference between revenues and outlays. The amount the government borrows is never exactly the difference between receipts and outlays. While in many years the numbers can be close, in some years the can be drastically difference. Case in point is in the GR, when the government borrowed a trillion to lend to banks to stabilize the financial system. It would also be the case where the government makes student loans directly, which it has done much more of the past decade.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
    ThorInc likes this.
  15. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My error, it was a different poster that confused the two but the fact remains you are trying to blur the line between the two in order to deflect from this singe fact.


    On January 20, 2009, when he was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion
     
  16. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do you think k995 thinks the debt and deficit are the same thing and is "confused"? There is nothing in his post to suggest that.

    The only "confused" person who doesn't seem to understand the difference between debt and deficits is you.
     
  17. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am trying to blur nothing. I said nothing about the debt. My statement was that deficits fell by about 2/3 during Obama's term, proved by data I posted linked to a reliable source.

    "Once again you seem to think debt and deficit are the same thing. You are either confused or trying to confuse others. Which is it?"
     
  18. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well then let's focus like a laser on the obama deficit reduction. You need to read the following to understand his bad economy actually helped in that regard along with the hocus pocus numbers in Obama care and a Republican "do nothing" congress.

    "Yes, budget deficits gradually dipped below $1 trillion by 2013, and then averaged $550 billion thereafter. Yet without expensive new legislation, they would have naturally fallen to $531 billion by 2011, and below $200 billion by 2013."
    "Yet surprisingly, the weak recovery has actually reduced budget deficits.
    How is that possible? The original January 2009 CBO baseline failed to anticipate the feeble economic recovery – which will shave an additional $3.1 trillion off the 10-year revenues. However, the same economic underperformance automatically saved $3.5 trillion in spending, mostly by lowering the interest rates paid on the surging national debt – a direct result of weak growth and the Federal Reserve's attempt to combat it."
    "CBO originally projected the act would reduce the 2009-19 deficit by $125 billion. Thanks to lower-than-expected exchange enrollment, it is now estimated to save $275 billion over that period, even despite certain taxes being postponed."

    The spending slowdown was caused by gridlock, not by Obama moderating his demands (point: conservatives). It is important to recognize that Obama did not stop trying to expand government after 2010. The president's eight annual budget requests gradually upped their 10-year revenue demands from $1.3 trillion to $3.4 trillion, while proposing an average of $1.0 trillion in new program spending over the next decade. His play, in short, was to gradually trim the budget deficit by chasing large spending increases with even larger tax increases. The Republican Congress stopped him.

    My assessment: Obama's most important fiscal legacy was a sin of omission. Despite promising to confront Social Security and Medicare's unsustainable deficits, the president refused to endorse any plan that would come close to achieving solvency. This surrendered eight crucial years of baby-boomer retirements while costs accelerated. With baby boomers retiring and a national debt projected to exceed $90 trillion within 30 years, this was no small surrender.

    Still, being "paid for" does not necessarily mean it was fiscally responsible. Approximately $700 billion in new benefits were funded by tax increases and Medicare cuts that are now unavailable to shore up existing entitlements or cut the escalating deficit. This will force future lawmakers to dig even deeper for savings when the bills come due.


    In fact, Washington's interest costs were lower in 2016 than in 1996, despite the national debt surging from $5 trillion to $20 trillion. Thus, the weak recovery actually saved Washington $400 billion relative to the baseline Obama inherited.


    https://www.usnews.com/opinion/econ...arack-obamas-real-economic-record-isnt-pretty
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  19. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't say anything about why the deficit was reduced by 2/3, just pointed out the fact that it was.

    Yes, Republican austerity was a factor in reducing the deficits, but so was increasing tax revenues:


    There are three main reasons for that: the slowly-improving economy is putting more people back to work, which means fewer safety net payments and more tax revenue; defense spending cuts; and the tax hikes from January 1 2013 have gone into effect.

    Indeed, it's not the spending side of the ledger that has shrank the budget deficit, but the tax side.


    http://townhall.com/tipsheet/keving...icit-shrinks-due-to-more-tax-revenue-n1590424

    And in fact, the Republican blocked Obama's attempts to increase revenues which would have reduced the deficits further.
     
    ThorInc likes this.
  20. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well we are not too far off in agreeing here. Once you look into the Obama deficit reduction you see it is not as advertised. Bad economy, higher taxes, fuzzy math.
     
  21. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks for sharing your baseless opinions. You've already demonstrated your confusion between deficits and debt.

    I stand my my assertion that the deficit was reduced 2/3rds during Obama's term, as proved by my link to the CBO.

    Others can decide for themselves.
     
    ThorInc likes this.
  22. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And knowing the details of that do you think it's anything to brag about? We're I you I'd run from it after the man behind the curtain has been exposed.
     
  23. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not bragging about anything. Just stating facts.

    For someone who seems confused by deficits and debt, I would be talking about running.
     
    ThorInc likes this.
  24. Josephwalker

    Josephwalker Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2016
    Messages:
    19,954
    Likes Received:
    10,174
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well I exposed the dirty little secrets behind your facts so yeah I guess bragging is out and I believe it was you trying to blur the line between deficit and debt that I also exposed.
     
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2018
  25. k995

    k995 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2011
    Messages:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No but we were talking about the increase of the deficit and debt due to trumps policies. So when you say "reverse" .

    So you think the deficit is going to go down? Down as in lower then what obama left it or as in lower then what trump is now blowing it up to (close to 1.3 trillion according to CBO predictions in a few years)
     

Share This Page