Deficit Down by 30% - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-11-2006, 07:42 PM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Deficit Down by 30%

Tax cuts spur economic growth. Critics dumbfounded.

Bush heralds improved deficit figures

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush touted new deficit figures Tuesday showing considerable improvement upon earlier administration predictions, saying it shows the wisdom of his tax cuts.

Bush himself announced the figures -- a task that for the most part has been left to lower-ranking administration officials in the past. The new figures show the deficit for the budget year ending September 30 will be $296 billion -- much better than the $423 billion that Bush predicted in February and a slight improvement over 2005.
__________________

__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 08:02 PM   #2
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 04:16 PM
oh so you're still happy that you have a TWO HUNDRED AND NINETY SIX BILLION DOLLAR DEFICIT FOR ONE YEAR?

it's practically criminal in canada not to have a SURPLUS.

well, have fun with that.
__________________

__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 08:05 PM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:16 PM
I'd be interested to see how much "growth" has reached the working/lower classes. It has been noted that much of our "economic growth" has been concentrated in the upper classes, which has generated this extra tax revenue.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 08:16 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 03:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
I'd be interested to see how much "growth" has reached the working/lower classes. It has been noted that much of our "economic growth" has been concentrated in the upper classes, which has generated this extra tax revenue.

Melon
Is this cynicism, nihilism, or skepticism?
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 08:20 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
Is this cynicism, nihilism, or skepticism?
It comes with the understanding that politics is rarely one-dimensional.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 08:54 PM   #6
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 03:16 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by melon


It comes with the understanding that politics is rarely one-dimensional.

Melon
I was only kidding with ya.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 10:01 PM   #7
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:16 PM
The skeptic asks the question and then goes and looks for the answer.

The cynic asks the question to poo poo the good news.

We may never know the difference.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 10:05 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The skeptic asks the question and then goes and looks for the answer.
I think you've read enough of my writings to know that I have a distaste for unanswered questions.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-11-2006, 10:40 PM   #9
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:16 PM
and it's still the 4th largest deficit in the nation's history, and our long term outlook is still very bleak as social security will start to run a deficit rather than a surplus, and the debt has increased by well over $3 trillion since Bush took office.

i suppose when you set the bar so low, it's not hard to leap over it and demand your trophy.

but Jr. has been doing this his whole life.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-12-2006, 12:09 AM   #10
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
and it's still the 4th largest deficit in the nation's history, and our long term outlook is still very bleak as social security will start to run a deficit rather than a surplus, and the debt has increased by well over $3 trillion since Bush took office.

i suppose when you set the bar so low, it's not hard to leap over it and demand your trophy.

but Jr. has been doing this his whole life.
Its far from being the 4th largest deficit in the nations history once you adjust for inflation. If you want record deficits and record national debt, go back to World War II when the national debt reached 150% of anual GDP in 1946. The national debt as a percentage of GDP has only increased slightly since Bush has been in office.

Jr. is doing just fine despite the democrats best efforts over the past 6 years to unseat him and his party from power. So far Bush and the Republicans are undefeated in the category and the democrats chances in November, their lost shot at Bush, appear to be getting dimmer now.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-12-2006, 12:15 AM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
Jr. is doing just fine despite the democrats best efforts over the past 6 years to unseat him and his party from power. So far Bush and the Republicans are undefeated in the category and the democrats chances in November, their lost shot at Bush, appear to be getting dimmer now.
Yet there's still the issue of the working/lower classes. If they aren't happy, no amount of macro-level numbers are going to please them.

Of course, this is where the diversion issues like gay marriage, flag burning, and school prayer come in to save the day for the GOP.

Anyway, my point here isn't to bash Bush, as much as to question whether these rosy numbers genuinely affect anyone besides those with six-figure incomes and higher. It's a running question of mine, considering the kind of weak job environment I see around where I live.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-12-2006, 10:50 AM   #12
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2
[B]

Its far from being the 4th largest deficit in the nations history once you adjust for inflation. If you want record deficits and record national debt, go back to World War II when the national debt reached 150% of anual GDP in 1946. The national debt as a percentage of GDP has only increased slightly since Bush has been in office.

but it is helpful to view the debt in context. the $271 billion - the level of debt by the end of World War II - had more purchasing power than it does today.

in fact, the national debt as a percentage of GDP has grown every year since Bush has been in office. in 2004, the $7.4 trillion national debt constituted 62.9 percent of GDP; in 2001 when Bush took office, the debt was 57.3 percent of GDP. in 1981, it was 32.9 percent of GDP; in 1929, it was just 16.3 percent. The 2004 figure of 62.9 percent is close to double that of 1981 and nearly four times that of 1929.

ultimately, the current debt load isn't the problem, yet. the problem, as i pointed out, is what happens after 2010, when retiring Baby Boomers begin placing demands on Social Security and Medicare. so it's less about where we are -- and the ability to make chest-thumping, nyah-nyah statements -- but it's the trajectory we're on.

with a so called “booming” economy, per the mantra of tax cutting logic, the debt ratio should be going down, but it continues to grow. US debt will double under Bush in both real dollars and as a percent of GDP.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-12-2006, 03:26 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Yet there's still the issue of the working/lower classes. If they aren't happy, no amount of macro-level numbers are going to please them.

Of course, this is where the diversion issues like gay marriage, flag burning, and school prayer come in to save the day for the GOP.

Anyway, my point here isn't to bash Bush, as much as to question whether these rosy numbers genuinely affect anyone besides those with six-figure incomes and higher. It's a running question of mine, considering the kind of weak job environment I see around where I live.

Melon
Well, the latest labor statistics available on the poverty rate are from 2004. I think once we see the 2005 figures and especially the 2006 figures, that the poverty rate is dropping to the lows it was at in the late 1990s.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-12-2006, 03:43 PM   #14
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511



but it is helpful to view the debt in context. the $271 billion - the level of debt by the end of World War II - had more purchasing power than it does today.

in fact, the national debt as a percentage of GDP has grown every year since Bush has been in office. in 2004, the $7.4 trillion national debt constituted 62.9 percent of GDP; in 2001 when Bush took office, the debt was 57.3 percent of GDP. in 1981, it was 32.9 percent of GDP; in 1929, it was just 16.3 percent. The 2004 figure of 62.9 percent is close to double that of 1981 and nearly four times that of 1929.

ultimately, the current debt load isn't the problem, yet. the problem, as i pointed out, is what happens after 2010, when retiring Baby Boomers begin placing demands on Social Security and Medicare. so it's less about where we are -- and the ability to make chest-thumping, nyah-nyah statements -- but it's the trajectory we're on.

with a so called “booming” economy, per the mantra of tax cutting logic, the debt ratio should be going down, but it continues to grow. US debt will double under Bush in both real dollars and as a percent of GDP.
Regardless, the national debt was 150% of GDP in 1946, it was by far the heaviest burden in terms of debt this country has ever had and it is a far greater burden than the country is currently under. Several European countries currently have national debts that exceed their annual GDP, like Italy. You will see problems in Europe with national debts, a far greater ratio of the retired to the working, most workers relying on the government for their pensions, much earlier than you will in the United States.

As long as the United States continues to grow economically and the labor base continues to expand, the Baby Boom and Social Security difficulties will not be a major problem. In Europe, there is definitely cause for concern because economic growth is very low, the labor base is not expanding, and the number of older Europeans to younger Europeans is expanding at a much faster rate than it is here in the United States.

Also the national debt moving from 57% of GDP to 63% of GDP is nothing to lose sleep over. The United States has had a national debt total that has averaged around 60% of the countries GDP since the 1980s. It has not stopped the United States from having one of the highest standards of living on the planet, year after year, according to the UN Human Development Index. In Europe, we have Italy and Greece sporting national debts of 107% and 108% of GDP respectively.
__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 07-12-2006, 03:54 PM   #15
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:16 PM


don't worry, be happy!

(and i love how we use 1946 -- an outlier year if ever there was one -- as our basis of comparison)
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com