PF Exclusive: Debt increase in FY2015 lowest in 14 years

Name one Democrat who did? Wasn't Clinton he opposed the measures that did and never proposed any that would. Gingrich and Kaisch and the Republican congress created and passed those budgets, and welfare reform. Clinton's political adviser told him he either signed them or he would not be relected and the Democrats would never take the Congress again, and then didn't until 2007. During which time we had one of the most successful economies in our history even going through the 2000/2001 recession with minor damage and then another 52 months of full employment, rising incomes soaring tax revenues and on the way to a surplus again.

Then the Democrats took control for the last 8 years and we see the disaster. Where did they take the deficit? To $1,400B, almost 4 times the WORST Republican deficit. In fact they never even came close to the worst Republican deficit.

So you really want to talk deficits while trying to brag on Democrats?

 

The data is, it is the cherry picking and the false interpretations it that I am talking about and routinely refute.

Presidents can recommend and threaten government shut downs when there is an opposition congress that's it unless they have opposition congress willing to negotiate. Depends on how much either side is willing to compromise. Presidential budget submissions are routinely ignored by the Congresses. For instance in 2008 Bush did manage to get the Democrats to cut back on some of their spending by threatening vetos, they only increased spending 9%. And this year Obama didn't get all the spending he wanted the the Republicans didn't get to budget cuts they wanted. But it is Congress that has the majority control in the budget. That is why certain liberal posters try to pass off the HUGE increase in the deficit in 2008 and 2009 to Bush, merely because he was President when in fact those budgets and increases were the doings of the Democrats in Congress. As I said it's not the accurate of the data it's how it is used. Or the claim that the Clinton tax increase increased tax revenue growth when in fact revenue growth slowed from 9% to 7%.

I blame Congressional Democrats of which he was one in 2008 and 2009 and then signed the 2009 budget into law in which his party included his spending request. Reagan requested less spending every year than Congress authorized and they did not pass all the recessions he submitted to them to cut spending.

I routinely show that it is.

And you still don't seem to understand the budget process and who controls spending.

 

Reagan requested less spending that what I was waiting for. You have tried that theory and pushed it so I will give you fact on your glory boy Reagan and his spending when he took office the debt was 907 billion when he left it was around 3.3 trillion. So you assert that Regan requested less spending but you have never gave a percentage. I know why as well as you he requested 1.8% less than what congress authorized. Let be really clear what Reagan requested 2.254 trillion that he requested to spend. He asked for that money and it is proven fact and you call that conservative?? Had he not raised taxes after he realized that slashing taxes caused huge problems he would have left massive of around 4.2 trillion. So your lame narrative that Reagan requested less spending is a joke Congress was one the hook for 2% of his budgets that he signed off on. Below are the actual numbers mine were estimates but it proves my point and makes your arguments DOA. Reagan the great conservative was a big ole myth. He was no more a Conservative is like saying the Holocaust didn't happen. Reagan even had the nerve to assault Carter about his free spending ways. Ford and Carter did a better job of cutting Government.

The only one here that does not understand budgets are you. You have continue to ignore facts very simple facts backed up by math. Plus trying to rewrite history. Reagan proposed massive increase in spending year after year. His budgets were 98% of the problem Congress 2% plus Republicans were largely in control during Reagan and Bush 1 terms. Regan like many Republicans blamed the poor as the problem and handed the rich more money. Reagan presidency was pathetic.

Bluesguy you just got owned! Have a nice day

http://zfacts.com/p/57.html

https://mises.org/library/sad-legacy-ronald-reagan-0

 

$326 billion deficit is pretty good.

 

The Treasury supports your post quite conclusively and we still have 9 months to go.

Date............Public Held...................Govt Held.....................Total debt owed.............Change (+/-)
12/24/2015 13,608,106,425,390.39 5,194,774,066,145.61 18,802,880,491,536.00 +652,262,825,051.67
09/30/2015 13,123,847,198,347.81 5,026,770,468,136.52 18,150,617,666,484.33 +275,359,575,277.25
10/01/2014 12,781,306,994,916.93 5,093,951,096,290.15 17,875,258,091,207.08

 

Executive Summary

One of the most persistent claims about the 1980s is that Ronald Reagan and George Bush were responsible for the large budget deficits of that decade and the resultant national debt.In reality, of course, both Congress and the administration share the responsibility. The problem is that the role that Congress played in deficitspending over 1982-93 is usually ignored. Congress often revises or entirely ignores White House budget requests, as with Reagan’s “dead on arrival”budgets. Because of the persistance of this charge, we examine the question:Who wasmostresponsible for the increase in the national debt, Reagan or theCongress?Comparing the Reagan budget requests with the amount of spending Congressactually approved, we conclude:

•Tax cuts had little to do with the explosion of the deficit.The deficits of the1980s are often blamed on the Reagan tax cuts of 1981. But the problem wasnot government income. Government receipts had almost doubled, risingfrom $517 billion in 1980 to $1.031 trillion in 1990.

•Congress outspent Reagan in every year.Congress typically savagedReagan’s spending requests as draconian and heartless. Then, theappropriators rewrote the budget for their priorities and spent a cumulative$209 billion above Reagan’s requests from 1982-1989.

•Congress spent substantially more on entitlements than Reagan requested.Reagan routinely asked for money-saving entitlement reforms. Congressignored the reforms and increased benefits and eligibility for entitlements.

•Reagan’s budget requests for the military were consistently higher than thelevels Congress appropriated.Congress spent about $80 billion less than Reagan requested on the military, but still spent around $390 billionmoreondomestic programs.

•Reagan recission requests were ignored.Reagan asked that $43.4 billion of appropriated funds not be spent. Congress approved only $16.5 billion,leaving $26.8 billion spent.These frustrations have also plagued almost all recent presidents. Congress spentalmost a half-trillion dollars of deficit spending above the requests of presidentsfrom 1976 - 1993.

•Bill Clinton, on the other hand, is the first president in over twenty years who has outspent Congress. During Clinton’s first two years, the 103rdCongress spent $54 billion less than Clinton requested. The 104th Congressspent $58 billion less than Clinton asked.
http://www.ipi.org/docLib/reagandf.pdf-OpenElement.pdf

The fact remains he did, his budgets were DOA and had they accepted his request the deficits would have fallen to under $100B the last three years of his administration.

Compared to what the Democrats would have spent had Carter or some other Democrat been president yes. Reagan knew he wasn't going to get his lower levels of spending all he could do was to negotiate it as low as he could get while the Democrats negotiated for as high as they could get.

It's not that he wanted to do it the fact was revenues were HUGELY increasing and had taxes not been raised and had Congress accepted his spending request we may very well have had balanced budgets.

Your claims that it was Reagan who wanted to increase spending and he did it all on his own as the Democrats fought to lower spending are absolutely absurd.

Far more than you both in real terms and historically else you would not be calling them the Reagan deficits.

As you prove again, his budgets were routinely DOA, not even out of committee yet you once again fallaciously claim they were all Reagan budgets. And not only did those poor become employed and taxpayers the higher earners paid more in income taxes and an higher share of taxes.

And when one starts making their specious claims of someone getting owned we all know who really got owned.

 

Reagan asked for 2% less than what congress gave him so 98% is on Reagan congress was not the problem it was Reagan. You have been told this time and time again. You can say bigfoot is real over over again it doesnt make it fact. Bush2 and Reagan are an extremely large part of the problem. Bush 1 was actually okay. But please do us all a favor quit making Reagan out to be a god of fiscal responcibilty. He blew through almost 3 trillion dollars in the early 80 god onlg knows how much money that is today.

 

Not each and every year it was actually about 5% less 4 of those years but nonetheless, he wanted even less spending, the Dems wanted even more spending. That has ALWAYS been the equation. The claim that it was Reagan that drove the higher spending is false and the fact remains had the Democrats taken his budget request the last three years we would most likely have hit surpluses then. So please do us a favor and stop claiming those were Reagan deficits as he he solely passed budgets and spent the money.

And the Dems also did it during Bush41, remember Bush giving in to their tax rate increases in return for spending cuts, cuts the Democrats never did?

 

No they didn't you make it sound like Dems had told control with both houses which is a flat out lie. Again go read history Reagan was a serial tax raiser, con artist, and he put 241 Marines in their graves. Reagan is responsible for 98% of his debt and years of problems.

 

Maybe LBJ should be looked at too.

 

They, Democrats, annually fought for higher spending along with a few liberal Republicans but primarily the Democrats drove the higher spending, but didn't get as high as they wanted, Reagan annually fought for lower spending and never got as low as he wanted. And especially those last 3 years when the Democrats had total control, had they passed the Reagan budget submissions and rescission we would have come close to a surplus again.

So stop repeating the Democrat myth it was Reagan who drove the deficits and debt.

 

Why are you all trying to place blame on Reps or Dems when you should make the U.S. government responsible for the financial mess they created to benefit themselves and the elite?

 

I, for one, feel that Ronald Reagan's first inaugural address epitomizes what we should both expect and demand from those elected to serve (US) in our Federal government. Our government(s) belong to the people, not the other way around.

 

Well maybe, should remind our government of that and maybe the people should find a way to get the government doing the job they are suppose to do.

 

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report, the “Budget and Economic Outlook: 2015 to 2025,” projects a brief slowdown in the national debt’s growth over the next 3 years, followed by a continuation of previous deficit trends.

By 2025, CBO projects the federal government’s deficit will exceed $1.088 trillion, or roughly $9,444 per American household.

Unchecked entitlement spending growth and demographic shifts continue to contribute to the problem, but increased subsidization of health care is a primary cause, according to Heritage Foundation budget expert Romina Boccia.

“The projected deficit explosion can be directly attributed to the increase in spending because of the aging of the population, rising health care costs and a significant expansion in eligibility for federal subsidies for health insurance Obamacare,” she said. “The major health care programs—Medicare, Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program and Obamacare—are driving 32 percent of the increase in spending over the next decade, followed closely by the Social Security program at 28 percent, and interest on the debt at 24 percent.”

 

If past is prologue or, as you say, if history is any portend, the next time we approach a balanced budget a Republican will run a campaign based on tax cuts, Americans will fall for it and we'll all get new toaster ovens. And before two years is up we'll be hopelessly in debt again. That's just the way we roll in the shire. Americans are suckers for trinkets.

 

Just to try and keep us focused on the great news about the growth of the debt having been turned around.

12/30/2015 End Q1 FY2016 - $18,825,061,664,535.94 +$674,457,386,785.31
09/30/2015 End of FY2015 - $18,150,604,277,750.63 +$326,532,897,016.81
09/30/2014 End of FY2014 - $17,824,071,380,733.82 +$1,085,887,854,036.50

 

Correction to the previous post shown above, as the Treasury has now added the last day of Q1 to their site.

12/31/2015 End Q1 FY2016 - $18,922,179,009,420.89 +$771,574,731,670.26
09/30/2015 End of FY2015 - $18,150,604,277,750.63 +$326,532,897,016.81
09/30/2014 End of FY2014 - $17,824,071,380,733.82 +$1,085,887,854,036.50

Government deficit spending, the gift that keeps on giving.

 

The only surpluses we have had in resent times and the only time we have come close again were after those tax rate cuts and other Republican policies. We have seen the results of Democrat policies the last 8 years and the only reason they have come down has been the "Republican sequester".

 

And how will you rationalize this;

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report, the “Budget and Economic Outlook: 2015 to 2025,” projects a brief slowdown in the national debt’s growth over the next 3 years, followed by a continuation of previous deficit trends.

By 2025, CBO projects the federal government’s deficit will exceed $1.088 trillion, or roughly $9,444 per American household.

Unchecked entitlement spending growth and demographic shifts continue to contribute to the problem, but increased subsidization of health care is a primary cause, according to Heritage Foundation budget expert Romina Boccia.

“The projected deficit explosion can be directly attributed to the increase in spending because of the aging of the population, rising health care costs and a significant expansion in eligibility for federal subsidies for health insurance Obamacare,” she said. “The major health care programs—Medicare, Medicaid, Children’s Health Insurance Program and Obamacare—are driving 32 percent of the increase in spending over the next decade, followed closely by the Social Security program at 28 percent, and interest on the debt at 24 percent.”

 

IMO there is plenty of fiscal blame for both parties! The only difference is how each party abuses their fiscal responsibility relating to their party preferences.

Once the federal government learned it could simply drive up debt, deficit spending became SOP. The federal government, from Obama on down, including Congress, create policy and pass legislation with spending and more spending with little to no regard for the debt situation. It's become cliche 'if we have $500 billion deficit spending then $800 billion deficit spending is okay' or 'if we have $16 trillion in debt then having $18 trillion is okay'.

Everyone can play games, argue about surpluses and debt, believe their party is more fiscally responsible than the other party, and it's all BS because as a nation and people we have become incapable of living within our means. We are self-serving refusing to do better, to sacrifice some, in order to give our kids and generations to come something better than we inherited!

Debt and deficit spending is math! We either are adding or subtracting and debt is either growing or declining. All the political BS in the world cannot change math...

 

12/31/2015 End Q1 FY2016 - $18,922,179,009,420.89 +$771,574,731,670.26 <--- Continuation of previous deficit trend
09/30/2015 End of FY2015 - $18,150,604,277,750.63 +$326,532,897,016.81 <--- Brief Slowdown
09/30/2014 End of FY2014 - $17,824,071,380,733.82 +$1,085,887,854,036.50

The Federal government doesn't borrow to fund Social Security, only to repay the excess revenues collected by the FICA tax that are spent each year on other government programs. Social Security is and has been fully funded as the tax and/or ceiling must be raised whenever needed or payouts reduced. I believe the same is true for Medicare.

 

Well there is certainly more in one direction than the other. Reagan fought Congress every year for lower spending levels and especially the last three years when the Democrats were in control had they accepted his budget submissions and recissions the deficits would have fallen to under $100B a year and heading towards a surplus again. The Democrats did NOTHING to cut spending and balance the budgets with their getting Bush41 to renig on his no new taxes for promised spending reductions which never came. Clinton came into office on a strong upward revenue growth, passed a tax rate increase and slowdown, not increased, that revenue growth. It took the Republican congress, Gingrich and Kaisch, to force tax rate cuts, wel-fare reform and spending restraint that then kick the economy into high gear and we saw the surplus years. The economy went into slowdown in late 2000 and Bush came into office with a recession starting in a matter of weeks. Tax rate cuts were passed but on a phase in schedule to 2006, when the Republicans saw the effects were not kicking in fast enough they accelerated the phase in in 2003-2004 and the economy went into high gear and the deficits, a peak of $400B in 2004, began to rapidly fall down to a measly $161B by 2007.

THEN the Democrats took control of the budget and raised spending 9% in 2008 and 18% in 2009 increasing the deficit from the $161B to $1,400B in just TWO YEARS and kept the deficit about $1,000B for the next four years never even coming close to the WORST Republican deficits.

 

You and others seem all goo-goo-gaa-gaa over the current deficit spending yet the CBO is saying the deficits will exceed $1 trillion per year by 2025? This is only 9 years from now!

 

IMO deficits and debt are not a political party problem. Every voter in the US, every citizen in the US, who continues to support the lack of fiscal responsibility, who continues to place and keep these idiots in office, some for decades, are 100% responsible for the deficits and debt. And, sadly, perhaps 5% of the voters and citizens give a crap about deficits and debt. So we have 95% of the voters and citizens perfectly fine with our fiscal policies. As long as the government does not raise taxes on the 95%...they could care less about deficits and debt! When you figure out how to snap the 95% out of their fiscal coma, then and only then will you see some sustained attention to deficits and debt...