Question To The Left Our National Debt Is Fast Approaching 17 Trillion Why Do You Think This Is Still Sustainable (parties, economic)

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You do realize that even if what you are saying is true, that would not change what you said in your comment which was that the Bush budgets and tax cuts pulled in more revenue than projected.

I made no such claim, I said the tax cuts grew revenues, the chart clearly shows they did

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You also said that the predicted budgets had deficits in them, again, even if what you just said is true, it still does not show a deficit in the CBO report.

That would make you wrong on both of the statements in your original response to me.

The US Treasury Department says your wrong.. There was never a projected surplus, only if you IGNORED debt created by intragovernmental borrowing, did you get a suprlus.. Thats something dummies do

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pghquest

I made no such claim, I said the tax cuts grew revenues, the chart clearly shows they did

The US Treasury Department says your wrong.. There was never a projected surplus, only if you IGNORED debt, did you get a suprlus.. Thats something dummies do

You said so in the context of responding to my comment. In my comment i said revenues were less than projected.

So you were either agreeing with me and using the wrong qualifier, or you were disagreeing with me, in which case you have been proven wrong.

either one is fine with me.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You said so in the context of responding to my comment. In my comment i said revenues were less than projected.

So you were either agreeing with me and using the wrong qualifier, or you were disagreeing with me, in which case you have been proven wrong.

either one is fine with me.

I said tax cuts grew revenues.. If you want to project that I meant something other than what I said, thats your problem, not mine. I dont give a rats ass about projections that were lies to begin with because YOU CAN NOT IGNORE BORROWING AND PRETEND YOU HAVE A SURPLUS.

I wasnt close to being wrong, you just showed you dont have a dam clue how "projections" were lies..

[the mask]

Except for the fact that its completely wrong.

The federal government alone has a debt of over $100 TRILLION in unfunded liabilibies.. The math only works if you ignore about $80Trillion and only count public debt..

Whats a missing $80 Trillion among friends..

Thanks for the info.

[NoJiveMan]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

You said so in the context of responding to my comment. In my comment i said revenues were less than projected.

So you were either agreeing with me and using the wrong qualifier, or you were disagreeing with me, in which case you have been proven wrong.

either one is fine with me.

In an article I'd found months ago, it stated that government revenues have been at their lowest point since the 1950's, of course, everyone knows that you cannot give tax breaks and execute two wars and not expect not to run deficits or run up debt. Funding for wars has to come from somewhere.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pghquest

I said tax cuts grew revenues.. If you want to project that I meant something other than what I said, thats your problem, not mine. I dont give a rats ass about projections that were lies to begin with because YOU CAN NOT IGNORE BORROWING AND PRETEND YOU HAVE A SURPLUS.

I wasnt close to being wrong, you just showed you dont have a dam clue how "projections" were lies..

Even though i disagree with you on everything you just said, im going to play your game for 10 seconds.

regardless of if projections are lies, it is what my comment was about. You chose to respond to my comment and claim the tax cuts increased revenues above that of the projections( again based on the content of my post).

You were wrong no matter how you try to twist it.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by pghquest

i didnt say crap about projections, I said they grow revenues, and your own charts proved I was correct

Repeating your lies (cough mistakes), doesnt make them right the 5th time around just like they werent correct the first..

THERE WAS NO FN SURPLUS!!! if you think I'm wrong, you go argue with the US Treasury Office who showed the debt CLIMBED every single year, even in years where Clinton claimed surpluses existed..

LIES, LIES, LIES, and the stupid people who believed the "projections", were truth.. haha

since you want to argue that projections are all lies.

then explain how revenues in 2001 were at 1.9 trillion and the 2003 fiscal year had a revenue of 1.782 trillion revenue did not get back to 2001 levels until 2005.

even if you lie to yourself about responding to the content of my comment(which would make no sense considering you quoted me), You would still be wrong because Revenues actually dropped for 2 years during the tax cuts.

and we are talking about a budget surplus, You do not have to have a net profit to have a budget surplus. You obviously need to take accounting again.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

since you want to argue that projections are all lies.

then explain how revenues in 2001 were at 1.9 trillion and the 2003 fiscal year had a revenue of 1.782 trillion revenue did not get back to 2001 levels until 2005.

even if you lie to yourself about responding to the content of my comment(which would make no sense considering you quoted me), You would still be wrong because Revenues actually dropped for 2 years during the tax cuts.

its called a dam recession. Tax cuts dont automatically turn economies around, it takes time to plan and deal with new code..

You cant be that ignorant to believe otherwise.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by dsjj251

and we are talking about a budget surplus, You do not have to have a net profit to have a budget surplus. You obviously need to take accounting again.

So you want to pretend you were correct, while discussing something that didnt exist. How does that work out exactly?

You indeed do not have a surplus if you BORROW (i.e. create debt).. Maybe I was wrong when I said you couldnt possibly be that ignorant.. Governments dont have "profits".. Sounds like YOU are the one that needs to take accounting again.

[MTAtech]

Originally Posted by the mask

I keep hearing from all the leftwing talking points regarding the national debt it's not a problem. Why isn't it a major financial problem facing the nation.

This is the answer:

Dwindling Deficit Disorder

Start with the raw numbers. America’s budget deficit soared after the 2008 financial crisis and the recession that went with it, as revenue plunged and spending on unemployment benefits and other safety-net programs rose. And this rise in the deficit was a good thing! Federal spending helped sustain the economy at a time when the private sector was in panicked retreat; arguably, the stabilizing role of a large government was the main reason the Great Recession didn’t turn into a full replay of the Great Depression.

But after peaking in 2009 at $1.4 trillion, the deficit began coming down. The Congressional Budget Office expects the deficit for fiscal 2013 (which began in October and is almost half over) to be $845 billion. That may still sound like a big number, but given the state of the economy it really isn’t.

Bear in mind that the budget doesn’t have to be balanced to put us on a fiscally sustainable path; all we need is a deficit small enough that debt grows more slowly than the economy. To take the classic example, America never did pay off the debt from World War II — in fact, our debt doubled in the 30 years that followed the war. But debt as a percentage of G.D.P. fell by three-quarters over the same period.