Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Under President Bush's plan, an average family of four's inflation-adjusted disposable income would increase by $4,544 in fiscal year (FY) 2011, and the national debt would effectively be paid off by FY 2010.
The net tax revenue reduction, after accounting for the larger tax base that would result from higher employment and faster economic growth under the Bush plan, is $1.1 trillion from FY 2002 to FY 2011, 33.4 percent less than conventional static estimates.
The plan would save the entire Social Security surplus and increase personal savings while the federal government accumulated $1.8 trillion in uncommitted funds from FY 2008 to FY 2011, revenue that could be used to reform the Social Security and Medicare systems and reduce the payroll tax."
When is he going to propose a balanced budget with a surplus so he can address the big natioanl debt?
The debt isn't our biggest problem, unemployment is, and the debt is mainly taking care of itself rather under control with current growth. So why would anyone want to focus on a balanced budget and torpedo the recovery?
The debt isn't our biggest problem, unemployment is, and the debt is mainly taking care of itself rather under control with current growth. So why would anyone want to focus on a balanced budget and torpedo the recovery?
The debt is taking care of itself with current growth?
Let's do a little cipherin' to dispel this frequent, yet incorrect contention.
The GDP is about $15 trillion
The debt is about $17 trillion
we collect about $2.5 trillion in federal revenues per year
we have interest rates of about 3.5% per year
........................so we have 16-17% of federal revenues relative to GDP.
Let us assume that we have an ASTRONOMICAL growth rate of 10% over the next 10 years. This, of course, is impossible, but we are "spotting" old MTA about 4X what the growth rate will actually be.
So we have an integration problem
If we assume this UNBELIEVABLE growth rate of 10%, we end up with $100 trillion in revenues and $137 trillion in debt.
So let us dispel this liberal cannard that we can "grow ourselves out of debt". It is absurd.
The debt is taking care of itself with current growth?
Let's do a little cipherin' to dispel this frequent, yet incorrect contention.
The GDP is about $15 trillion
The debt is about $17 trillion
we collect about $2.5 trillion in federal revenues per year
we have interest rates of about 3.5% per year
........................so we have 16-17% of federal revenues relative to GDP.
Let us assume that we have an ASTRONOMICAL growth rate of 10% over the next 10 years. This, of course, is impossible, but we are "spotting" old MTA about 4X what the growth rate will actually be.
So we have an integration problem
If we assume this UNBELIEVABLE growth rate of 10%, we end up with $100 trillion in revenues and $137 trillion in debt.
So let us dispel this liberal cannard that we can "grow ourselves out of debt". It is absurd.
Recently the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities took Congressional Budget Office projections for the next decade and updated them to take account of two major deficit-reduction actions: the spending cuts agreed to in 2011, amounting to almost $1.5 trillion over the next decade; and the roughly $600 billion in tax increases on the affluent agreed to at the beginning of this year. What the center finds is a budget outlook that isn’t great but isn’t terrible: It projects that the ratio of debt to G.D.P., the standard measure of America’s debt position, will be only modestly higher in 2022 than it is now.
The center calls for another $1.4 trillion in deficit reduction, which would completely stabilize the debt ratio; President Obama has called for roughly the same amount. Even without such actions, however, the budget outlook for the next 10 years doesn’t look at all alarming.
Recently the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities took Congressional Budget Office projections for the next decade and updated them to take account of two major deficit-reduction actions: the spending cuts agreed to in 2011, amounting to almost $1.5 trillion over the next decade; and the roughly $600 billion in tax increases on the affluent agreed to at the beginning of this year. What the center finds is a budget outlook that isn’t great but isn’t terrible: It projects that the ratio of debt to G.D.P., the standard measure of America’s debt position, will be only modestly higher in 2022 than it is now.
The center calls for another $1.4 trillion in deficit reduction, which would completely stabilize the debt ratio; President Obama has called for roughly the same amount. Even without such actions, however, the budget outlook for the next 10 years doesn’t look at all alarming.
That was really funny.
Apparently you did not read the CBO report yourself, but just took the liberal processed interpretation of that "data".
In the CBO report, it assumes a MARKED decline in annual federal spending of 10% per annum over the next five years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now let me see.......................... we just had Obama blow a gasket over 2% spending cuts. Now who in thier right mind really thinks that Obama will deliver 10% spending cuts over the next five years?
I just showed you, with a little simple integral calculus, how our debt problem, even with unrealistic massive increase in GDP (which will never happen), will continue.
Wake up- do the math yourself. Unless there are marked spending cuts (at least the 10% per annum as the CBO fantasy), then we might have a chance.
No one believes the liberal BS that spending can continue as usual. We have the data and can make some simple calculations to show that it is just plain bull crap. Spin all you want- it just aint so.
Apparently you did not read the CBO report yourself, but just took the liberal processed interpretation of that "data".
In the CBO report, it assumes a MARKED decline in annual federal spending of 10% per annum over the next five years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Now let me see.......................... we just had Obama blow a gasket over 2% spending cuts. Now who in thier right mind really thinks that Obama will deliver 10% spending cuts over the next five years?
I just showed you, with a little simple integral calculus, how our debt problem, even with unrealistic massive increase in GDP (which will never happen), will continue.
Wake up- do the math yourself. Unless there are marked spending cuts (at least the 10% per annum as the CBO fantasy), then we might have a chance.
No one believes the liberal BS that spending can continue as usual. We have the data and can make some simple calculations to show that it is just plain bull crap. Spin all you want- it just aint so.
I have no idea where you got that idea. This is from the CBO in Aug. 2012:
Quote:
What Is the Budget Outlook for 2014 to 2022 Under Current Law (CBO’s Baseline)?
Deficits and Debt: Budget deficits are projected to continue to shrink for several years—to 2.4 percent of GDP in 2014 and 0.4 percent by 2018—before rising again to 0.9 percent by 2022. With deficits small relative to the size of the economy, debt held by the public is also projected to drop relative to GDP—from about 77 percent in 2014 to about 58 percent in 2022. Even with that decline, however, debt would represent a larger share of GDP in 2022 than in any year between 1955 and 2009.\
Revenues: Most of the projected decline in the deficit occurs because revenues are set to rise considerably in the coming years under current law—from 15.7 percent of GDP in 2012 to 19.6 percent in 2014 and 21.4 percent in 2022. Between 2012 and 2014 alone, revenues in CBO’s baseline shoot up by one-quarter as a share of GDP because of the expiration of various tax cuts at the end of 2012, the expiration of provisions related to the AMT at the end of 2011 (which will boost tax receipts mainly in 2013 and later), and other factors.
Outlays: Outlays, by contrast, are projected to be a smaller share of GDP in 2022 under current law (22.3 percent) than they are in 2012 (22.9 percent). Discretionary spending is projected to decline relative to GDP throughout the next 10 years because of the caps on discretionary funding that stem from provisions of the Budget Control Act. By CBO’s estimate, discretionary spending will fall to 5.6 percent of GDP by 2022—the lowest level in at least 50 years. Mandatory outlays will remain about the same as a share of GDP through 2019, CBO projects, and then will grow faster than the economy, reaching 14.4 percent of GDP in 2022, compared with 13.2 percent in 2012.
Net Interest: Despite the surge in federal borrowing in recent years, net interest outlays are projected to hold steady at 1.4 percent of GDP through 2015, primarily because interest rates are expected to remain near historic lows for the next few years. Interest rates are anticipated to rise noticeably thereafter, causing net interest outlays to increase to 2.3 percent of GDP by 2020, CBO projects.
The OP must be brain damaged. It's obvious the drop in income was caused by "the great recession" which was entirely the result of failed Bush/Republican policies.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
