ADVERTISEMENT

The Debt Ceiling

by "investing", you mean investing in themselves only, not the country.

which to them is "wise".

which yes, is why the rich have a surplus. A MASSIVE BEYOND BELIEF SURPLUS.

and why the govt has to borrow to meet it's commitments.

when the original distribution of income is "almost all for ownership, bare minimum to pay expenses for workers", that's to be expected is it not.

and what that leads to in the long run is expected as well.

we've balanced the budget in the past.

what's changed is the initial distribution of income, and the tax rates for the rich and corps.

Employers use the investments of the rich to help make workers more productive. This then allows employers to raise wages.

Everyone benefits.

If we start taking more from the rich they will take their marbles and play in other country's backyards. Help raise the standard of living elsewhere.

IGW, when I say stuff like the above to people who know me, they will ask, "You don't really believe that, do you ?".
 
Employers use the investments of the rich to help make workers more productive. This then allows employers to raise wages.

Everyone benefits.

If we start taking more from the rich they will take their marbles and play in other country's backyards. Help raise the standard of living elsewhere.

IGW, when I say stuff like the above to people who know me, they will ask, "You don't really believe that, do you ?".

A), they already took their marbles, because we let them.

B), employers keep all the productivity gains, they don't pass them along to employees in wage increases.

C), you don't really believe that do you?

and in case Margaret Thatcher's ghost hasn't noticed, the rich just keep getting richer and richer and richer and richer.
 
spending%20table%201.png


There is your increase.
Food stamps & welfare, staples of Republican spending.🤣🤣
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Congress was not responsible for the PPP fraud. That was entirely on the Trump admin. They were shoveling money out the door completely recklessly and with zero safeguards.
Compared to what? A majority of government is fraud, which why it should be much smaller.
Trump is the same as Biden, Obama, and etc. He isn’t unique when it comes to wasteful government spending.
 
Compared to what? A majority of government is fraud, which why it should be much smaller.
Trump is the same as Biden, Obama, and etc. He isn’t unique when it comes to wasteful government spending.

A majority of govt is fraud? Wtf is that supposed to mean?
 
OK, but you guarantee the majority of government dollars go to things we all support? Wrong and your link didnt tell me that.
It wasn't a real link. It was a failed joke. But there are plenty of polls out there that prove we actually support the spending that happens. Do you support SS? Do you support the military? Then you support the majority of government spending. Period.
 
It wasn't a real link. It was a failed joke. But there are plenty of polls out there that prove we actually support the spending that happens. Do you support SS? Do you support the military? Then you support the majority of government spending. Period.
The polls are useless until we pay for it. It just shows people like free shit. Raise taxes 25% and tell me how much people like their government.
 
Do you support SS
As it was originally organized, if that was still how SS was organized, the only needed spending "may" have been administration. The only reason that the country is being held hostage over double paying to bail out SS is because DC STOLE the funds that we paid into SS, to "repay it later" and we end up paying it back as a double tax penalty for not nuking (figuratively) DC years ago. And the beat goes on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
Defense and social security are free shit? Give up your retirement and your protection, and we'll talk.
Why would I give up my retirement? I’d make 15% more income and would invest it without SS taxes.

Also, you never refuted that we’re currently spending 25% more than we’re taking in. If we raise taxes to the limit that actually pays for what we’re spending then I would agree with you and the polls. Until it happens, they are useless.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
It wasn't a real link. It was a failed joke. But there are plenty of polls out there that prove we actually support the spending that happens. Do you support SS? Do you support the military? Then you support the majority of government spending. Period.
Support those? Yes . I dont support most of the specific issues. We need to keep out of funding womens studies in other countries. Stupid wars we have no skin in. I'm sure the Democrats are making big money from the Ukraine mess. I'm not going deeper. How many billions in weapons did we leave in Afghanistan so we can now give Ukraine money to fight against?
 
Support those? Yes . I dont support most of the specific issues. We need to keep out of funding womens studies in other countries. Stupid wars we have no skin in. I'm sure the Democrats are making big money from the Ukraine mess. I'm not going deeper. How many billions in weapons did we leave in Afghanistan so we can now give Ukraine money to fight against?
Most of our money goes to retirees and the military. You want to cut? Cut. Make your proposals. Cutting trans rights won't make a tiny f*cking dent in the budget. But have at it.
 
Most of our money goes to retirees and the military. You want to cut? Cut. Make your proposals. Cutting trans rights won't make a tiny f*cking dent in the budget. But have at it.
Then someone better manage it better. The amount of free stuff is ridiculous. You seem to be on a one track mind. We waste so much money it isnt even funny. You could cut a third to half of government employees easily. I mean all the way not just federal. We have property taxes out of control with schools throwing money away for one example. Indiana implemented an at the time one year wheel tax yrs ago. Funny it still shows up every year on my plates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
Most of our money goes to retirees and the military. You want to cut? Cut. Make your proposals. Cutting trans rights won't make a tiny f*cking dent in the budget. But have at it.
To be clear, I’m on board cutting the military and SS. I’d raise the SS taxation limits and the age people receive it. I’d also cut back on the increases each year. The reality is this will never happen because old people vote. I’m not against SS in theory, but our government sucks. So we can’t have nice things. FDR set us on path of bankruptcy in the 30s, because humans are to selfish to do the right thing.
 
Then someone better manage it better. The amount of free stuff is ridiculous. You seem to be on a one track mind. We waste so much money it isnt even funny. You could cut a third to half of government employees easily. I mean all the way not just federal. We have property taxes out of control with schools throwing money away for one example. Indiana implemented an at the time one year wheel tax yrs ago. Funny it still shows up every year on my plates.
Then cut them. But that's not where the money goes. The money goes to SS benefits and military toys. You want to cut? Tell us where to cut. Don't put up fake targets. Cut where it really costs.
 
Then cut them. But that's not where the money goes. The money goes to SS benefits and military toys. You want to cut? Tell us where to cut. Don't put up fake targets. Cut where it really costs.
How am I going to cut them? Did I piss in your cheerios this morning?

I think I just did schools spend way too much , pools were discussed in another thread a huge expense. Free computers for another.

You fail to address all of the total waste and bureaucracy of way to many Govt employees. Property tax again on long standing properties re assessing every year? Really? It sure never goes down so we all file appeals and all the money spent as just one.
 
The annual budget has increased by 40%. You aren't clawing back the money. You are looking at the 2019 budget and comparing it to 2024 and asking, "Why does agency or program X need 40% more money than they did in 2019 which was 5 years ago?" Or you ask "Why do we need to continue to spend X amount of money on this program that maybe did not exist in 2019?"

All your other stuff is just boo hoo. Democrats spend oodles of government money to fund their pet projects and never pass tax increases to cover it and Republicans cut taxes without ever cutting government programs. Both parties are negligent in handling the budget, they just burn the candle from different ends. Also notice I did not mention anything partisan, you brought the parties into the discussion. I just said to stop eating so much. Do you honestly think the world ends if we got the government back to levels it was at less than 4 years ago? Come on.

ETA: I am asking a 300 lbs. man to cut back to a double cheeseburger instead of eating a triple. And the double cheeseburger was something he was eating when he was 250 lbs and increasing his weight. The triple he just started eating put the weight gain into overdrive. He is still going to be eating a double cheeseburger, just like he did 4 years ago. He isn't starving.
Yeah . . . your post would have been more persuasive had you insisted on foregoing the PPP at the time it was issued. And now you want to forego clawing that back . . . OK, I can understand that.

I said in another post that I think this is all about "I got mine". Y'all got the PPP. Why shouldn't non-business owners get some sugar?

My guess is that Republicans are already way ahead on the sugar front.

Capice?
 
Yeah . . . your post would have been more persuasive had you insisted on foregoing the PPP at the time it was issued. And now you want to forego clawing that back . . . OK, I can understand that.

I said in another post that I think this is all about "I got mine". Y'all got the PPP. Why shouldn't non-business owners get some sugar?

My guess is that Republicans are already way ahead on the sugar front.

Capice?
Did any Democrat congressperson vote against the Cares Act?
 
  • Like
Reactions: snarlcakes
You tell me. I Googled it, and found confusing stories like the GOP passing a measure they voted against previously . . . I gave up trying to make sense of it. I don't have the time right now.
There may have been one person that opposed the bill. It was a bipartisan failure. Which isn’t unusual
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
Yeah . . . your post would have been more persuasive had you insisted on foregoing the PPP at the time it was issued. And now you want to forego clawing that back . . . OK, I can understand that.

I said in another post that I think this is all about "I got mine". Y'all got the PPP. Why shouldn't non-business owners get some sugar?

My guess is that Republicans are already way ahead on the sugar front.

Capice?
I honestly don't remember what my position was on all the money that got handed out back then. Go ahead and claw back what you can for the PPP, I never said that couldn't happen but anything in the past, particularly something you have to claw back, is going to be a drip in the bucket compared to the baseline that was just set for the yearly budget.

Again, the budget in 2019 was 40% less than the 2023 budget. That 40% increase occurred supposedly because of a once in a lifetime pandemic, ergo, when that pandemic was brought under control, the spending should have come down. Instead we have now baked that emergency increase into our baseline budget for comparison going forward.

Everybody got their "sugar" during the pandemic. You, me, everyone. The question is why we should continue to have that additional sugar for a pandemic baked into future budgets? The 2019 budget was the true trajectory of where government spending had been (and it was massively increasing already) and now we have turned an emergency once in a lifetime "everybody gets their sugar" pandemic budget into our baseline budget. That is stupid. Claw back what you can of the $800B PPP, get the people who committed fraud but don't pretend that $800B is the big deal when you are looking at an almost $1.8T every year above the 2019 baseline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
I honestly don't remember what my position was on all the money that got handed out back then. Go ahead and claw back what you can for the PPP, I never said that couldn't happen but anything in the past, particularly something you have to claw back, is going to be a drip in the bucket compared to the baseline that was just set for the yearly budget.

Again, the budget in 2019 was 40% less than the 2023 budget. That 40% increase occurred supposedly because of a once in a lifetime pandemic, ergo, when that pandemic was brought under control, the spending should have come down. Instead we have now baked that emergency increase into our baseline budget for comparison going forward.

Everybody got their "sugar" during the pandemic. You, me, everyone. The question is why we should continue to have that additional sugar for a pandemic baked into future budgets? The 2019 budget was the true trajectory of where government spending had been (and it was massively increasing already) and now we have turned an emergency once in a lifetime "everybody gets their sugar" pandemic budget into our baseline budget. That is stupid. Claw back what you can of the $800B PPP, get the people who committed fraud but don't pretend that $800B is the big deal when you are looking at an almost $1.8T every year above the 2019 baseline.

That's not accurate, re baseline budget. Surely you know that. Think harder and try again.
 
That's not accurate, re baseline budget. Surely you know that. Think harder and try again.
No, for the way the federal government operates, that is functionally accurate. Now you can make the argument that they have the option to cut the budget at any time and that is completely true. However, I am 44 years old and I cannot ever remember a time in my life where the federal budget shrank. Without looking I am thinking that post WW2 we probably saw a decrease in federal spending but it has been increasing ever since then with an explosion of spending starting in the 1980's and then going into overdrive at the turn of the century.

So when we go to the budget negotiations now, the spenders will say that this inflated budget due to the pandemic is our baseline for spending and any attempts to walk it back are spending cuts and how oh how can we live without them. I know this because it just happened. You would have to cut about 32-35% of the 2023 budget just to get back to the 2019 trend lines. That won't happen and you know it. The trend line for increased spending jumped way quicker than it has been and now that 100% increase in food stamps from 2019 to 2023 is going to become sacrosanct. You will have to fight tooth and nail and be accused of starving people to reduce spending that doubled over the course of 4 years.

So yeah, technically the government could pass a $1 budget but that isn't reality. What I described above is the reality. In the budget negotiations the spending baseline was just increased to national emergency numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe_Hoopsier
No, for the way the federal government operates, that is functionally accurate. Now you can make the argument that they have the option to cut the budget at any time and that is completely true. However, I am 44 years old and I cannot ever remember a time in my life where the federal budget shrank. Without looking I am thinking that post WW2 we probably saw a decrease in federal spending but it has been increasing ever since then with an explosion of spending starting in the 1980's and then going into overdrive at the turn of the century.

So when we go to the budget negotiations now, the spenders will say that this inflated budget due to the pandemic is our baseline for spending and any attempts to walk it back are spending cuts and how oh how can we live without them. I know this because it just happened. You would have to cut about 32-35% of the 2023 budget just to get back to the 2019 trend lines. That won't happen and you know it. The trend line for increased spending jumped way quicker than it has been and now that 100% increase in food stamps from 2019 to 2023 is going to become sacrosanct. You will have to fight tooth and nail and be accused of starving people to reduce spending that doubled over the course of 4 years.

So yeah, technically the government could pass a $1 budget but that isn't reality. What I described above is the reality. In the budget negotiations the spending baseline was just increased to national emergency numbers.

Good baseline numbers would be to look at a full govt omnibus appropriation numbers by year.

In FY2018, the full govt omnibus was $1.3T. For FY2023 it was $1.7T. So it went up 30% over a 6 year period. That's a 4.5% annual compound growth rate in the discretionary budget. Much too high, IMHO, but a lot less drastic than your presentation. We had a very significant increase in defense spending under Trump, and then a significant increase in non-defense discretionary (NDD) under Biden.

Outlays are not a good way to look at budget numbers. Outlays could be happening today for money that was appropriated several years ago, including the giant Covid buckets of money that were appropriated.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT