Republicans in Congress have done a 180 on the deficit

[woodguyatl]

Great news. They have finally come to agree with the Democrats that debt is not a big deal. And I agree.

Also, I am gong to send of a preemptory flare to @Jack V Savage to help me out if he is so inclined as this is going to quickly get over my head.

"Republican lawmakers in 2011 brought the U.S. government to the brink of default, refused to raise the debt ceiling, demanded huge spending cuts, and insisted on a constitutional amendment to balance the budget.

On Wednesday, they formally broke free from those fiscal principles and announced a plan that would add $500 billion in new spending over two years and suspend the debt ceiling until 2019. This came several months after Republicans passed a tax law that would add more than $1 trillion to the debt over a decade.

With all these changes, the annual gap between spending and revenue in 2019 is projected to eclipse $1.1 trillion, up from $439 billion in 2015. And they are expanding the deficit at an unusual time, when the economy is growing and unemployment is low, a dynamic that often leads to shrinking budget gaps."

“I don’t think there’s any question but that there’s a bury-your-head-in-the-sand view of the deficit and the debt issues relative to this Congress and this administration,” said former senator Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), who once led the Senate Budget Committee.

The debt binge caps off a major reversal for the Republican Party, which has been swept up by President Trump’s demands for more spending and tax cuts at a time when the public seems to care less about debt than it has in years.

........


White House officials have dismissed concerns about the deficit, saying some of these near-term moves are necessary to speed up economic growth. But their growth projections often don’t match the expectations of budget experts and economists, which means that much of the revenue they have promised might not materialize."

Here is a link to the WaPo article but I think it is behind a pay wall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...72e2047c935_story.html?utm_term=.1a799018964d

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Shocking. Must be because they're spending money on the right things. Deficits don't matter when you're buying bombs and warplanes and shit.

 

[panamaican]

They've thrown the idea of fiscal conservativism out the window...until they lose the White House. And then they will morph into obstructionists pretending to suddenly care about this issue again. They've been extremely disappointing for the last decade or so.

When they're in power, they don't reform anything and raise the debt. When they're out of power, they don't reform anything and keep agreeing to raise the debt. They're basically just a party defined by disagreeing with the Democrats as this point.

 

[HomerThompson]

They've thrown the idea of fiscal conservativism out the window...until they lose the White House. And then they will morph into obstructionists pretending to suddenly care about this issue again. They've been extremely disappointing for the last decade or so.

When they're in power, they don't reform anything and raise the debt. When they're out of power, they don't reform anything and keep agreeing to raise the debt. They're basically just a party defined by disagreeing with the Democrats as this point.

*4 decades

 

[VivaRevolution]

You're right of course, but come 2020 when President Sanders takes office, they will remember what the phrase fiscal conservative means again.

 

[Rational Poster]

You're right of course, but come 2020 when President Sanders takes office, they will remember what the phrase fiscal conservative means again.

 

[Shoemaker]

Shocking. Must be because they're spending money on the right things. Deficits don't matter when you're buying bombs and warplanes and shit.

Exactly. It's sort of like riots. They're okay if your team won at football, but otherwise you should probably be shot.

 

[trident]

Republicans have done a 180 on many things, the environment, racisism, military adventures, fucking other people than your wife, Russia, etc.

To be fair, the Dems have pulled plenty of 180s themselves, from slavery and racism, supporting the working class, military adventures, Russia.... but theyve always supported fucking someone other than your wife.

At least someone is constant

 

[HomeCheese]

The last president to do a good job with the debt was Clinton. W was the worst when it came to spending. Used to be a breed of Republicans called "progressive Republicans" where they believe in social freedoms and conservative financial policies. They have long disappeared and neither party seems to care about finances anymore.

Our leadership is at an all time low in my lifetime. Nixon even looks good compared to these clowns.

 

[Swing]

I used to be naive and think that I sided with them when it comes to fiscal stuff. I guess the silver lining to this is that now I can pretty much condemn them wholesale.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

The last president to do a good job with the debt was Clinton. W was the worst when it came to spending. Used to be a breed of Republicans called "progressive Republicans" where they believe in social freedoms and conservative financial policies. They have long disappeared and neither party seems to care about finances anymore.

Our leadership is at an all time low in my lifetime. Nixon even looks good compared to these clowns.

Nixon had some very interesting policy ideas , his paranoia did him in

 

[Letssnuggle]

I totally agree. But I don’t have a problem with it. Why would I!?

Now, come back in three years and if we’re still producing Obama 1.8% gdp growth then yea, at that point they’re failures.

Which is the entire point you’re all willfully ignoring: GDP was correctly predicted to be lack luster under Obama. So ok, you’re all now on record essentially stating GDP growth under GOP leadership will resemble the DNC’s. And that’s stupid as hell to say at this point.

GDP growth is what pays the deficit.

 

[Happiness]

They've thrown the idea of fiscal conservativism out the window...until they lose the White House. And then they will morph into obstructionists pretending to suddenly care about this issue again. They've been extremely disappointing for the last decade or so.

When they're in power, they don't reform anything and raise the debt. When they're out of power, they don't reform anything and keep agreeing to raise the debt. They're basically just a party defined by disagreeing with the Democrats as this point.

Regan raises the deficit with tax give aways to the wealthiest, Bush does the same.

Clinton reduces the deficit, creates surplus.

Bush 43 again raises the deficit with tax give away (and war).

Obama reduces the deficit.

Trump, again with tax give aways, blows the budget out by about 500 billion in one year.

In fact, the last R potus to leave office with balanced books was Eisenhower.

It's a load of shit that Rs are the financially responsible party, historically the opposite is true.

 

[woodguyatl]

I totally agree. But I don’t have a problem with it. Why would I!?

Now, come back in three years and if we’re still producing Obama 1.8% gdp growth then yea, at that point they’re failures.

Which is the entire point you’re all willfully ignoring: GDP was correctly predicted to be lack luster under Obama. So ok, you’re all now on record essentially stating GDP growth under GOP leadership will resemble the DNC’s. And that’s stupid as hell to say at this point.

GDP growth is what pays the deficit.

So, for the record, you think that the GDP will increase at .3% per year or more.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffre...emselves-if-we-wait-long-enough/#102dc4de11bc

 

[Letssnuggle]

So, for the record, you think that the GDP will increase at .3% per year or more.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffre...emselves-if-we-wait-long-enough/#102dc4de11bc

Of course. But personally I’ll require more based on their spending and the fact Trump ran as a pro-growth America first president. < 4% would be underperformance and I’d vote accordingly. The GOP has 3 more years.

 

[Demoslasher]

I totally agree. But I don’t have a problem with it. Why would I!?

Now, come back in three years and if we’re still producing Obama 1.8% gdp growth then yea, at that point they’re failures.

Which is the entire point you’re all willfully ignoring: GDP was correctly predicted to be lack luster under Obama. So ok, you’re all now on record essentially stating GDP growth under GOP leadership will resemble the DNC’s. And that’s stupid as hell to say at this point.

GDP growth is what pays the deficit.

In order for the GDP growth to account for all the increased spending from just his first year in office, it would need to grow at a rate never seen before, and what would drive this growth? No respectable economic mind, right wing or left, thinks these tax cuts will pay for themselves. Furthermore the Obama economy was a very strong economy, and is the economic Trump inherited then took credit for

 

[VivaRevolution]

I totally agree. But I don’t have a problem with it. Why would I!?

Now, come back in three years and if we’re still producing Obama 1.8% gdp growth then yea, at that point they’re failures.

Which is the entire point you’re all willfully ignoring: GDP was correctly predicted to be lack luster under Obama. So ok, you’re all now on record essentially stating GDP growth under GOP leadership will resemble the DNC’s. And that’s stupid as hell to say at this point.

GDP growth is what pays the deficit.

I didn't know you were such a keynesian.

 

[Scheme]

Shocking. Must be because they're spending money on the right things. Deficits don't matter when you're buying bombs and warplanes and shit.

Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security are much bigger costs than defense/war.

They need to reform healthcare quick, especially since the interest rates on the debt are starting rising. Healthcare should be the #1 issue in the country right now, not gay rights, Trump tweets, DACA, etc.

Also, US currently has an insane debt to revenue ratio, hopefully a party realizes this and does something. We could have had Ron Paul...

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I used to be naive and think that I sided with them when it comes to fiscal stuff. I guess the silver lining to this is that now I can pretty much condemn them wholesale.

Losers can't even follow through on restoring 2nd Amendment rights even though the fucking stars are aligned with them holding Congress and the Presidency. Goes to show why that shit party doesn't get my vote.

Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security are much bigger costs than defense/war.

They need to reform healthcare quick, especially since the interest rates on the debt are starting rising. Healthcare should be the #1 issue in the country right now, not gay rights, Trump tweets, DACA, etc.

Also, US currently has an insane debt to revenue ratio, hopefully a party realizes this and does something. We could have had Ron Paul...

So spend away? Not sure your point, but I agree with the simple observation.

Reform healthcare? Not sure how they could embarrass themselves further on that.

Would take Ron over The Donald, for sure.

 

[Oeshon]

its one of the biggest things I disagree with Trump and most repubs on. Only a few of the more libertarian guys are on the right page about limited government and reduced spending.

there is so much government spending that you could just take a knife to and cut the shit out of.