Federal debt explodes by $1 trillion in five weeks since deal suspending limit became law

You have given zero data. You have provided speculation that tries to attribute, among other things, higher tax revenue to supply side economics.
No proof, no causal link. You don't even mention whether or not the tax revenue is from businesses.

In short, you are not even making an argument, you are stating your opinion: Democrats/liberals bad, Republicans/conservatives good.

Fault 2. Love 30.

 

I posted the OMB historical table data. Feel free to refute it.

Yes or no are you admitting that tax revenues hit a 15% increase under the Bush43/Rep fiscal and tax policies? Which is it?

Do you admit that after hitting a recession high deficit of $400B Bush43/Reps quickly brought it down to a measly $161B by 2007?

Do you admit that the subsequent BEST Dem deficits didn't even come close to the Reps WORST?

 

Great , you posted data.
You haven't established a causal link to supply side economics.
You haven't established that Bush43/Rep fiscal and tax policies had any effect on any part of any increase in tax revenues.
Clinton left office with a surplus.
Bush left office with a $1.4 trillion deficit.

Who was the last Republican who left office with a budget surplus ? In the last 2 centuries ?

 

So does the term 'mental gymnastics' actually mean 'verified studies' in your world?

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/healthcare/484301-22-studies-agree-medicare-for-all-saves-money/

Also more links below, some may be duplicative. Every single one shows cost savings over time.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext
https://peri.umass.edu/publication/item/1127-economic-analysis-of-medicare-for-all
https://www.healthcare-now.org/single-payer-studies/listing-of-single-payer-studies/
http://www.pnhp.org/system/assets/d...tent&eId=ac666dcf-c1bb-4eb0-a6ea-39c4a9bb5321

 

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/statistics/data/federal-budget-receipts-and-outlays

The largest posted fiscal deficit was Trump. GW Bush is second place in 09 with 1.4T at the end of his last fiscal year, dealing with his first round of the recession stimulus.

Outlays started rising in Clintons last fiscal year and continued upwards wiht only two dips, Obama's first fiscal year, and his 2013 fiscal year. Otherwise it's a constant climb.
Clinton saw a big rise in Revenues from his first term to his last, and while GW had a decent rise, the oncoming recession becomes evident in his last year with said stimulus package and the oncoming recession.

Interestingly enough, both GW Bush and Obama saw the same amount of years before Revenues returned to pre recession levels.

 

I could care less who the DNC paid to tell them what they wanted to hear. I'll stick to common sense.

 

Odd response considering the DNC has nothing to do with any of that, but hey, keep sticking fingers in your ears and praying reality away. No skin off my back.

 

Only the COVID emergency spending which has a HUGE * on it.

That was a Democrat budget signed into law by Obama including Obama's stimulus spending, why do you attribute that to Bush43? The Dems TOTALLY cut Bush out of that budget and bragged about doing so. It including NO Bush43 spending.

Well revenues were rising thank you Gingrich and Kasich and the Republican budgets and tax policies Clinton was forced to "triangulate" to.

The Democrats including Senator Obama took back the Congress Jan. 2007 and their first fiscal year was 2008. They were handed a Bush43/Rep deficit of a paltry $161B. Two years later they had it at the $1,400B and they kept it over $1,000B for the next three years. It was the Republican sequester and austerity bills that cut that deficit back down to just over $500B but the Dems had INGRAINED LOTS of that new spending into the budgets and we just saw have far the will go and how hard they will fight to increase spending even more during the debt limit fight.

He saw revenues on a strong upward curve when he came into office and he slowed that curve with is tax rate increase as I showed. It took the Republican supply-side cuts and welfare reform and spending restraint he was forced to sign onto that brought some order to it and indeed produce budget surplus. Bush43 and the that Rep Congress had it in that direction again heading to surplus until the Dems took back the Congress.

Why do you seem to insist the budgets ONLY have to do with who is President? Congress has the majority control over the budget not the President.

 

I know. I have take no issue with most govts spending during covid, and it's one of the few area's I don't criticize Trump for. But the fact is the fact.

What? No it wasn't. This was Bush's last budget, submitted on Feb 4, 2008. Obama wasn't even elected until Nov of 2008.

Eh. Revenues were rising in the last year of Bush Sr. Bush's Deficit peak was in 92, and dropped from 290b to 255b in his last year, and then Clintons first year got it down to 205b in his first. He had the brief shutdown that resulted in the budget reconciliation act.

Also, Clintons first budget only passed thanks to Al Gore's tie breaking vote, and in it were an increase on taxes for high earners, the creation of 2 new tax brackets, increased taxes on Social Security, an Energy Tax, expanded the EITC, etc..

The next budget was the shutdowns of 95-96, which the Republicans lost, and passed Clintons Budget after the 2nd shutdown, without Gingrich's desired cuts.

This saw a 9% increase in Revenue from Bush Sr's last fiscal year to Clintons first fiscal year. Then Clinton saw 2 years of 7.4% revenue increases each, before things really took off with an 8.6% increase in 97, a 9% in 98 (the Surplus years start), a 6.1% in 99, and a 10.8% in 2000, then a -1.6% in 2001 during/after the dot com crash and the stock market, but still a surplus. Bush's first signed bill was the first deficit year post Clinton (and the start of the 2 Bush Tax Cut bills

And none of this even broaches the subject of the 'Off the Books' spending on the Iraq war.

The main driver of that last year Bush Deficit and the first admin of Obama was due to the Recession.

Bush signed the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Feb 200 which authorized 152billion extra spending, so it stands to reason why the deficit suddenly exploded in his last year. Also, Bush could have veto'd the Dems passed budget if it was so onerous, but realistically they already were, or just starting to see the oncoming recession, hence the extra money resolution, and thus, the much higher deficits of the proceeding years.

lol what? The deficit was already falling in Bush Sr last fiscal year, as I said above. The Welfare reform act wasn't signed until August of 1997, and the Fiscal Year end in Sept of 97 showed a 20b deficit. I highly doubt that the act had that much of an effect in that short of period of time.

Funnily enough, Newt Gingrich's time as speaker oversaw an increase to the gross debt by 700b during his time as speaker.

I haven't insisted on anything. I literally just responded to the discussion that was occurring on Deficits during Presidential Years. In fact, this comment by you was what prompted me to look in the first place

The answer to this is that the Reps have the worst pre-08 recession deficit in 2004, a year that the Reps controlled all 3 levels of the US Govt, and retained that power in that 04 election.

Presidents have Veto power, as Clinton showed in the 95-96 shutdowns that ended with Clintons budget passing. The President also sets the stage with their budget proposal to congress who then debates and ultimately approves or denies it. I agree that the makeup of congress is important in discussions such as these, which is why I made sure to assess the numbers with that idea in mind.

 

And a HUGE asterik and should never be used in some comparison of deficits and debts, the country had no choice, too bad our debts was already so high.

Submitted and summarily rejected and a continuing resolution passed. The budget, the Omnibus Spending Bill for FY2009 was not passed until March of 2009 so that President Obama could add his requested spending on top of the already bloated Dem Congressional budget bills and President Obama signed it into law. And the ONLY reason the FY2008 deficit was $400B was because Bush threatened to veto the Dems higher demands.

YES I know we were coming out of a recession into a recovery which Clinton inherited. And "Bush's deficts" were Dem budgets. Remember the infamous Bush breaking his no new taxes pledge for Dem promised spending cuts which never took place, DEMS drove those deficits. The fact is Clinton's tax increases COST revenue growth as I showed. Clinton requested MORE spending every year than even the Dem Congress authorized and especially more than the REP Congress would pass.

And TAX REVENUE GROWTH SLOWED.

It took the tax cuts and regulatory and spending restraint and welfare reforms of the REP Congress that got things back on track and revenues hit 10% and with their spending restraint we actually had surpluses. And Bush43/Rep Congress had us heading back to that after the 2001 recession.

Nope the Reps got their budgets inspite of Clinton along with their other policies as he triangulated to their policies.

YES he inherited a strong uptick in tax revenues in the recovery he inherited and passed his tax rate increases and instead of that rate of increase increasing even more it SLOWED. And the additonal tax revenues due for the first two years was differed to 95 and 96 and even with those differed revenues tax revenue growth fell to 7%.

Then the Reps took back the Congress, Dick Morris Clinton's political adviser told him to get on board with those tax rate cuts and welfare reform and spending restraining budgets they were sending him face not being reelected. So he did and you are correct this is what happened:

Yep with that recession that began weeks after he took office. But he and the Republican Congress passed mostly the correct measures including lower not just capital gains tax rates but across the board tax cuts, huge at the bottom end taking millions off the tax roles completely. Then they restrained their spending increases and we hit a peak deficit of $400B and as the tax rate cutes full implemented the economy took off and we hit EVEN MORE REVENUE INCREASE hitting 15% and the deficit fell to a paltry $161B by 2007.

Then then Dems took back the Congress with that measly $16B deficit, full employment, rising incomes, solid GDP. This a year before the 2008 recession began.

So who did their policies do going into a slowdown then recession and into recovery compared to the Reps? How close did their lowest deficit compare to the Reps worst deficit? How far did they get it down to before the Reps began to take back the Congress?

All my numbers are TOTAL government spending on and off budget. The additional spending for the wars in 2007 was $88B and included in the deficit number. That spending FELL as the war was over so was not a factor under Obama until of course his plans failed and he had to ramp it back up to save the situation he had created.

The main driver of Bush42's first year was a recession, dot.com bust and 9/11 arrack. What's your point? We elect these people to institute policies to help mitigate the length and depth of recessions and get us into recoveries and maintain economies that can survive the economic cycles we go through.

Which side has the better record when you actually LOOK at the policies and actual make up of the government and not just the simpleton well he was president here and he was president here.

Bush signed NEGOTIATED budgets with a DEMOCRAT CONGRESS as a LAME DUCK. And guess who was demanding even HIGHER spending Bush or the Dems? He got them to back off at $400B for 2008, the next year they cut him out completely BRAGGING about it and how he would not hold their feet to the fire this year.

YES we were coming out of a recession. We still had the Reagan tax rates in place to help the economy get back on track. YES the Rep welfare reform then and with Bush43 gets a double whammy, it cuts a government expense and brings in new tax revenue from the now new tax payer. And remember Clinton pledged to rescind it had he been given a Dem Congress his last two years but the country wanted none of it, that Contract With America and the other Rep policies were doing quite well thank you very much.

And surplus budgets that paid some of it down.

And AGAIN who is PRESIDENT does not dictate the budget and resulting deficits and debt FAR FROM IT. It is sheer folly to simply list deficits and who was President and then say SEE Republicans do this and Dems do that. It is FAR more complex with the balance of power.

And what happens when Presidents try to shutdown the government? That's a losing battle. And government is SUPPOSED to be about compromise and negotiation. Their budget proposals are routinely cast into the waste baskets by Congress as Dead on Arrival especially if both houses are controlled by the opposing party, their is no obligation Congress even read his budget "suggestions".

 

In practice, when you ignore the rhetoric and campaign BS, the two parties are pretty similar when it comes to government spending. But so far, it seems the Democrats are the ones who actually try to make sure that spending is paid for.