Record Tax Revenues For FY14

Discussion in 'Budget & Taxes' started by Arphen, Sep 24, 2014.

  1. dad2three

    dad2three New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "TreasuryDirect gives the complete debt, in a simple format"

    IF the conversation WAS about debt that would be helpful. IT'S NOT. It's about YEARLY BUDGETS. Money coming in versus money going out in a yearly (Oct 1-Sept 30th) basis
     
  2. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What if you take in more than you spend, but you borrow more money, say to have cash on hand to cover anticipated expenses?
     
  3. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Then address ALL the money that comes in and ALL the money that goes out. You are not doing that, and when you do you find that the net of the total money in and the total money out equals the change in the total national debt.

    You are repeating yourself, and so am I. If you don't get it by now, you are beyond the ability of this forum to educate. Spend some time reading, not repeating the same propaganda.
     
  4. dad2three

    dad2three New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I did. JUST because EXCESS taxes come into the treasury and as required by law, buy bonds DOESN'T refute the FACT that ALL revenues are counted AND ALL YEARLY EXPENSES ALSO!
     
  5. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Not the case at all. Who told you that? Rush?
     
  6. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You've already been given that information previously.

    Here it is again, from your Treasury Department, giving ALL the money that comes in and ALL the money that goes out.


    Monthly Treasury Statement

    These files contain the monthly receipts/outlays and deficit/surplus of the United States published in Table 1 of the Monthly Treasury Statement, for fiscal years 1981-2014. The figures reflect backdated adjustments and may be amended (monthly) based on agency reporting.

    http://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/current.htm

    Here's the data for FY2000:

    Period - Receipts - Outlays - Deficit/Surplus(-)
    Oct-99 121,035 r147,361 r26,326
    Nov-99 121,375 r148,406 27,031
    Dec-99 201,196 168,114 -33,081
    Jan-00 189,478 127,326 -62,152
    Feb-00 108,675 150,409 41,734
    Mar-00 135,582 170,962 35,380
    Apr-00 r295,151 r135,653 -159,497
    May-00 146,002 149,612 3,611
    Jun-00 214,875 r158,986 -55,888
    Jul-00 134,074 r129,013 -5,061
    Aug-00 138,128 148,555 10,427
    Sep-00 r219,490 r153,743 -65,747

    Cumulative for 12 months ending Sep (FY2000): -$236.917 billion (Surplus)


    You are repeating yourself. If you don't get it by now, you are beyond the ability of this forum to educate. Spend some time reading, not repeating the same propaganda from a RW computer programmer with no background in accounting or economics.
     
  7. BrianBoo

    BrianBoo Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2015
    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
  8. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's simple. $3.5 trillion in spending and still a $1/2 trillion deficit.

    Looks like we're collecting less tax revenue than we're spending. Thnx conservative Republicans :roll:
     
  9. Cordelier

    Cordelier New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think you're accounting for the Social Security Surplus... if Soc. Security takes in more than it spends, by law it has to invest the surplus in nonmarketable Federal Debt. This increases the Federal debt, but so long as the Budget is balanced, it takes money out of the credit markets and puts downward pressure on interest rates.

    For the debt not to increase Soc. Security would have had to take it's surplus and put it into some giant mattress or something.
     
  10. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    107,541
    Likes Received:
    34,488
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am talking actual dollars, not paper balance sheets which count this or don't count that.
     
  11. Cordelier

    Cordelier New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,165
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not quite sure what you're talking about - can you give me a practical example?
     
  12. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes thanks Republicans that the deficits are down to $1/2 trillion, you DO credit them with the austerity and lower spending don't you?
     
  13. dad2three

    dad2three New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    2,490
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #Obamaquester? They were for it before they were against it


    Is the GOP attempting to rewrite history on the sequester? It certainly seems that way.'



    “It’s totally disingenuous,” he told Buzzfeed. “The debt ceiling deal in 2011 was agreed to by Republicans and Democrats. And regardless of who came up with the sequester, they all voted for it.”

    Here are highlights from some GOPers who seem to be changing their tune:

    Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell

    2011: “The bill does not solve the problem but it at least forces Washington to admit that it has one,” and the upcoming debate is not “something to dread.”

    2013: Obama is presenting the country with only two options: “Armageddon or a tax hike. Well it’s a false choice and he knows it. But then the president is master at creating the impression of chaos as an excuse for government.”

    Speaker John Boehner

    2011:“When you look at this final agreement that we came to with the White House, I got 98% of what I wanted. I’m pretty happy.”

    2013: The cuts are “Obama’s sequester.”… The Senate needs to get “off their ass” and do something… “The American people know if the president gets more money they’re going to spend it. The fact is that he’s gotten his tax hikes. It’s time to focus on the real problem here I Washington and that’s spending.”

    Rep. Jeff Miller of Florida

    2011: Miller voted for the sequester.

    2013: The “Administration’s sequestration threatens to reduce our military’s readiness and throw our nation into another recession.”

    Rep. Peter Roskam of Illinois

    2011: Roskam, too, voted in favor of the sequestration.

    2013: “The sequester is the president’s sequester.”

    Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia

    In 2011: Cantor acknowledged the Budget Control Act was “not perfect” but praised the House for having “prevented default and boosted economic certainty by ensuring America pays its bills while we start getting our fiscal house in order…It will finally begin to change the way Washington spends its taxpayers dollars.”

    In 2013: “The president, he’s the one that proposed the sequester in the first place.”

    Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin

    In 2011: “What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years, are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money,” he told Fox News. “…And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can’t turn that off without a super-majority vote. We got that into law. “On the House floor, he said the law was “a victory for those committed to controlling government spending.”

    In 2013: The sequester “will probably occur” because “the president has not a proposal yet on the table…Don’t forget, it’s the president who first proposed the sequester. It’s the president who designed the sequester as it is now designed.”


    http://www.msnbc.com/hardball/obamaquester
     
  14. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My post was addressed to a specific person and their claims about the sequester.
     
  15. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think the 2 are one and the same, they mirror each other very closely.
     
  16. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Republicans opposed to the 2013 tax increase that resulted in a significant jump in revenues.
     
  17. Bluesguy

    Bluesguy Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    153,338
    Likes Received:
    39,002
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Nope just like with Clinton increasing tax rates as the economy is recovering and revenue growth accelerating and he slowed that growth as you well know, so have the Obama tax rate increases.

    Actual

    2010 2.67%
    2011 6.11%
    2012 5.99%
    2013 11.71%
    2014 8.15%

    Projected curve without the increase

    2010 2.67%
    2011 6.11%
    2012 5.99%
    2013 8.24%
    2014 9.90%

    As you can see revenues were heading to 9.9%, but after his first year blip that rate of growth is slower than it would have been, he bent the curve down.

    But I asked about spending which you want to avoid so please address what I asked

    Yes thanks Republicans that the deficits are down to $1/2 trillion, you DO credit them with the austerity and lower spending don't you?
     
  18. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

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

    The austerity spending cuts have reduced the deficits as well, but at a cost of reducing economic growth, so it's hard to say how much they have really helped.
     
  19. Iriemon

    Iriemon Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    82,348
    Likes Received:
    2,657
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BTW, exactly what are those percentages you posted?
     
  20. unrealist42

    unrealist42 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2011
    Messages:
    3,000
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The biggest contribution to deficit reduction last year was increased revenues.
     

Share This Page