The numbers are in, and Trump's tax cut didn't reduce the deficit – despite his many promises

On 4/25/2015 the Federal Debt was exactly $18,151,939,363,157.10
On 1/20/2017 it was $19,947,304,555,212.40

Obama ran up $1,795,365,192,055.30 in his last 636 days.

That's a hard fact, and heel kicking won't change it.

My GDP comparison is perfect. I used the entire complete Trump set and an equal number of full quarters for Obama, the closest in time.

I use all FIVE of Trump's full quarters and Obama's last five full quarters.

We are better than stable, our Debt to GDP ratio is improving under Trump, whereas it was deteriorating under Obama.

 

MY "blubbering"...........

Still waiting
YOU tell me what they DID do that helped to mitigate the damage that worked and got us into a full recovery and kept the deficits from exploding and got everyone back to work in short order, you never want to answer that question. Obama sold his stimulus as it would hold unemployment to 8%, it was 7% at the time, and then it would quickly fall. Instead it soar to 10% with a steep decline in LFPR and stayed over 9% for two years and didn't get down below 7 for what 5 years? Tell me what they did that worked.

 

Quote: "The Trump Tax Cuts have resulted in RECORD TAX COLLECTION. Cutting them would mean a greater imbalance"

Record???????? by what comparing measure?

You are parroting a fallacy......

COMPARING FY2018 REVENUES and PREVIOUS FISCAL YEAR'S REVENUES

a. Measure; Revenues per capita, adjusted for inflation, NOT A RECORD

b. Measure; Revenues as a percent of GDP, adjusted for inflation, NOT A RECORD

c. Measure; Average revenues per employed, adjusted for inflation, NOT A RECORD

d. Measure; FY2018 revenues vs previous fiscal year's revenues, adjusted for inflation, IS A RECORD, however, it's an idiotic comparison due to the fact, in the past, less people were contributing, and your RECORD only compares total revenues adjusted for inflation, example;

Yesterday, 10 people contributed $20, adjusted for inflation, 10 X $30 = $300

Today, 12 people contributes $30, 12 X $30 = $360...…..well, of course It's a record!

HOWEVER, YOU CAN'T DO THAT!

 

The tax cuts didn’t reduce the deficit? Well, I’d give it a little more time. But if they don’t reduce the deficit, then we need to drastically cut spending.

 

Oblama continued the Boosh taxcuts..

 

]

What about SPENDING?

Again, FY2018 SPENDING ($4.1 trillion) is most likely a RECORD compared to previous fiscal years, adjusted to inflation, HOWEVER, per capita, per GDP, per whatever, CERTAINLY NOT A RECORD!

Comprendez?

 

Why did he do that?

 

OR

THIS!

OUR PROTECTIONIST IMMIGRATION POLICIES IS MAINTENING OUR PERCENTAGE OF WORKING POPULAITON AT 47.5%

In reference to our low Unemployment Rate of 3.8%; rate; IRRELEVANT due to the fact several countries have much higher unemployment rates, however, their percentage of working population is above 52%, thus, more people are working/contributing DESPITE THE FACT U.S. HAS THE HOTTEST ECONOMY.

Sep 2018 U.S. population; 328.03 million
Sep 2018 total employed; 155,962,000
percentage of working population; 47.5% rounded off

Question; Good or bad?

Answer; Very bad considering the fact we have a $750 billion deficit, thus, IF WE DON'T CUT SPENDING, then obviously, we need much more workers/contributors, millions more!

There are several reasons why our percentage of working population will be maintained at 47.5%, mainly;

a. Our protectionist immigration policies....we've been biting our nails on several immigration proposals;

I. Blanket amnesty
ii. Merit-based immigration system
iii. increasing the H-1b Visa Cap

b. Effective today, and by 2028, a majority of boomers will turn 65, daily average, 12,500/4.5 million annually,

VERY IMPORTANT INFO

In another thread, I once asked this question

From Sep 30th 2017 to Sep 30th 2018, Trump's economy added near 2.6 million jobs, and average hourly earnings have increased by 2.8 percent, however, same time period, Social Security and other payroll taxes have only increased by $8 billion, WHY?

Sep 30th, 2017; $1.162 trillion
https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0917.pdf

Sep 30th, 2018; $1.170 trillion
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm522

Well, LOGICALLY, I figured it out;

The Average Salary by Age

16- to-19-year-olds is $420 per week
20-to-24-year-olds is $528 per week
25-to-34-year-olds is $758 per week
35-to-44-year olds is $950 per week
45-to-54-year-olds is $962 per week
age 55-64 is $954 per week
65 and older earn an average of $888 per week

https://smartasset.com/retirement/the-average-salary-by-age

Now, I don't have the exact figures, but in reference to said average 4.5 million boomers turning 65 annually, assuming;

1.5 million will keep themselves employed at same wages, average $950 weekly
1.5 million will keep themselves employed at lower wages, average $450 weekly
1 million will leave the workforce, and
500,000 have applied/will apply for a disability, "the older you get, and still employed, the more likely you are to be disabled" $250 weekly

Average FICA total Contributions prior to turning 65

4500000 X average $950 X 52weeks X 7.65% = $17 billion + employer's contributions = $34 billion

Average FICA total Contributions after turning 65

4500000 X average $500 X 52weeks X 7.65% = $9 billion + employer's contributions = $18 billion

Difference; minus $14 billion

 

Folks, one reason why I'm an independent conservative is because among Democrats and Republicans, there have been too many idiotic comparisons, such as;

Quote: "Obama doubled the national debt"
Response; "Yeah, but Reagan tripled the national debt"

IRRELEVANT!

What matter most;

a. Debt to GDP ratio, and/or
b. Interest payments as a percent of GDP/Outlays

And for anyone's info, Reagan's 1988 Debt to GDP ratio; 50%, TODAY, over 100%.

---------------

In addition, one component of GDP, and one factor affecting revenue growth Republicans have always ignored is GOVERNMENT SPENDING.

Quote: "Since the full implementation of Bush tax cuts, revenues have increased by blah blah blah"

HOWEVER, since the full implementation of his tax cuts, Bush also spent hundreds of billions above his baseline budgets with supplemental requests to cover operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and hurricane Katrina, from 2004 to 2006, over $300 billion above his baseline budgets.

Now, in several forums, here's a question I've been asking Republicans since 2008;

QUESTION; From 2004 to 2006, how much growth/revenues Bush's supplemental requests have generated?

Their response;

 

What time period are you referring to ? and where is the link supporting your claim.

 

I'm not sure where you came up with that response.
But Trump is doing a job on home prices with his tariffs.

 

No, Obama did not make that claim.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...bama-said-stimulus-would-cap-unemployment-8-/

 

You guys all count funny.
You need to see what they would have been with just normal population growth.
Then, and most important to this conversation, you should not count the naturally increasing tax revenue from before the tax cut, as in October to February.
Of course they didn't pay for themselves.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjATegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw157PWDfhIYViDoVfJeWLOT

 

YES he did

"it comes via a Jan. 9, 2009, report called "The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan" from Christina Romer, chairwoman of the president's Council of Economic Advisers, and Jared Bernstein, the vice president's top economic adviser.

Their report projected that the stimulus plan proposed by Obama would create 3 million to 4 million jobs by the end of 2010. The report also included a chart predicting unemployment rates with and without the stimulus. Without the stimulus (the baseline), unemployment was projected to hit about 8.5 percent in 2009 and then continue rising to a peak of about 9 percent in 2010. With the stimulus, they predicted the unemployment rate would peak at just under 8 percent in 2009."

That was HIS economic advisers and HIS report on what the stimulus would produce if passed. If is what HE used to sell it to the Congress. And it was a TOTAL failure. Didn't even come close to what he and his economic counsel said it would do unemployment EXPLODED and the stimulus did NOTHING to curtail it.

Tell me what the stimulus accomplished? What did we get for the $900,000,000,000 stimulus? What did we get for the next three years of $1,000,000,000,000 deficits?

 

I could care less about those compared to GDP. The government budget has NOTHING to do with GDP. Government budgeting should be based entirely on what are the necessary and authorized functions of the government and what does that cost. Just because GDP goes does not mean government requires more money to operate or should borrow more money.

 

[Dupe]

 

I take it you support the President instructing the department and cabinet heads to come up with 5% budget cutbacks?

 

You know exactly what timeframes we are discussing so don't obfuscate I answered your question do show the courtesy to answer mine.

YOU tell me what they DID do that helped to mitigate the damage that worked and got us into a full recovery and kept the deficits from exploding and got everyone back to work in short order, you never want to answer that question. Obama sold his stimulus as it would hold unemployment to 8%, it was 7% at the time, and then it would quickly fall. Instead it soar to 10% with a steep decline in LFPR and stayed over 9% for two years and didn't get down below 7 for what 5 years? Tell me what they did that worked.

 

Could always increase revenue...

 

You keep ignoring/ talking over my comments on the problems with your methodology. There is no "Trump 5 full quarters". The first Trump fiscal year started in October 2017.

 

FALSE!

Trumps GDP
2nd 18 4.2
1st 18 2.2
4th 17 2.3
3rd 17 2.8
2nd 17 3
Average 2.90

Obama's GDP
4th 16 1.8
3rd 16 1.9
2nd 16 2.3
1st 16 1.5
4th 15 0.4
Average 1.58

Trump's Tremendous Improvement - 84%

GDP Forecast for 6th quarter:

 

You yell out "FALSE" but your post does not even address my post. The first Trump fiscal year started October 2017.

You can run around in a circle crying "FALSE - FALSE - FALSE" all you like but this will not change what is the truth into a falsehood

 

It most certainly did. You said Trump has not had 5 full quarters and he most certainly has.

You are simply continuing in your denial of the overwhelming fact that Trump is much better at this than the Unfortunate Community Organizer.

Looking forward to the 6th quarter so we can extend the comparison!

 

He has not had 5 full fiscal quarters. It is not my fault that you do not understand how our budget process works. The first Trump fiscal year started in October 2017. The last Obama fiscal year started in October 2016 and ends at the end of September 2017.

In addition - why are you posting GDP when the conversation is the amount of deficit ? You are way down the rabbit hole and have lost your way