Feb Budget Deficit Largest on Record

Presidents do not singularly control budgets and spendings, Congress has primary control of the budget. The above is statistical nonsense.

 

Another fallacy, Presidents do not singularly control budgets and deficits.

 

Unless he is Obama - then it's all his fault, right?

 

That's obvious - to all but the Trump FanBoys who credit Trump with single-handedly making roses grow from republican butts ...

 

FY2019 (Oct-Feb) Cumulative Receipt; $1.278 trillion
FY2018 (Oct-Feb) Cumulative Receipt; $1.286 trillion
NEGATIVE $8 billion despite the fact more people are employed;
Total employed Feb 2018; 155,213,000
Total employed Feb 2019; 156,949,000
??????

 

You are wrong on numbers, as usual. The GOP ruled Congress from 1994 to 2006 and was responsible along with Bush for the near collapse of the economy.

Those facts will never change.

 

No they aren't. They lack GDP and the proper context. You know better than that Jake. Come on, stop being so disingenuous.

 

JakeStarkey said: ↑
Carter - 43% increase in the debt during his fiscal years in office. (just 4 years).
Reagan - 186% increase in the debt during his fiscal years in office.
Bush I - 54% increase in the debt during his fiscal years on office (just 4 years).
Clinton - 32% increase in the debt during his fiscal years in office.
Bush II - 101% increase in the debt during his fiscal years in office.
Obama - 79% increase in the debt during his fiscal years in office.
The figures above are complete and in context. You know that.

What is fallacious and out of context is for you to condemn Obama without being transparent and objective about the economic situation into which he came, caused by Bush and the GOP all the way back to 1994.

Yes, they are in context. We are talking about budget deficits. Please stop trying to confuse the issue, and please address why the GOP is committed to larger deficits.

 

Still using the old numbers I see. Why don't you go get the latest ones?

 

False, they are far from compete as was demonstrated by Zorro and myself. Keep parroting a lie and it still never becomes the truth.

 

Speaking of context. How about the whole picture.

This fiscal year is the first to fully incorporate the reduced tax rates that Mr. Trump signed into law in late 2017, including cuts for individuals and closely held businesses and steep reductions for corporations. It continued a trend from the final three quarters of 2018, after the tax cuts took effect: falling tax receipts, at a time of relatively strong economic growth — a combination that shows the tax cuts are achieving nothing close to the administration’s promise that they would pay for themselves.

Corporate tax receipts fell by $9 billion for the quarter, or 15 percent. Individual receipts fell by $17 billion, or 4 percent. Interest costs on the debt rose by $16 billion for the quarter, or 19 percent. Interest costs for December were up 47 percent from the same month in 2017.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/us/politics/budget-deficit-trillion.html

 

The numbers come from the Department of Treasury. What part of that particular post is a lie? The numbers? The President associated with the numbers?
I wasn't trying to list the entirety of economic data - just what President was in the White House during those fiscal years and the corresponding rise in the debt. What part of that is a lie?

 

They are incomplete and you know that, as it was explained to you on multiple occasions.

 

This is complete and in context, all the rest with the exception of Zorro can be ignored.

 

Bull ****. He claims that Carter's economy impacted Reagan's results but that Bush's Recession did not impact Obama's results. That's deceitful and out of context. Just a Jon Snow moment.

 

The deficit is a planned event to enrich the financial sector. The larger the deficit the more money it can make off of financing it. Deficits are an integral part of our national monetary management system.

 

Don't loser your temper. It is complete and in context, all the rest with the exception of Zorro can be ignored. Your numbers are fiction because they tell a half truth.

 

Bull crap. Everything I posted was the truth. Zorro's crap isn't the whole story. He claims that Carter's economy impacted Reagan's numbers and then tries to turn around and say that Bush's economic problems had no effect on Obama's numbers. That is deceitful. It's bull crap and you know it. I posted the numbers and did not taint it with bull crap commentary. Straight numbers from the Treasury Department.

 

Incomplete and far from the truth. Making up numbers and posting them as fact doesn't make them facts, no matter how you spin it.

 

MAGA

 

You ought tell that to Trump (and his cronies).

 

This is the truth. It's complete and explains where you lack the full perspective Daniel. Please read and understand .

 

BuckyBadger said: This is complete and in context, all the rest with the exception of Zorro can be ignored.

Bucky and Zorro have steadily ignored the GOP control of Congress from 1994 to 2006 and Bush's responsibility for the Great Recession at the beginning of Obama's first term. Both have had it pointed out to them many times and always doubles down on the inaccurate description of cause and effect of the economics.

 

A decade ago. {yawn}.

Trump's rate of growth over his first two years is exactly the same as Obama's last two years, yet his GDP growth rate is 68% better. That's why the Debt as percentage of GDP is currently the best in 7 years.

You seem kinda angry and delusional.

Good day.

 

Last year's GDP was the best in 12 years, not bad for his first full year.