Some encouraging news on deficit

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by orangeblueorangeblue, Jul 11, 2013.

  1. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,052
    Likes Received:
    595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/11/news/economy/treasury-budget-june-surplus/

    I don't care how it happens or who's involved, but we gotta see more months like that.
  2. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,584
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,949
    The trillion dollar question is: Will the government pay down the deficit with that supposed surplus?

    Where are the White House tours?
  3. g8orbill
    Offline

    g8orbill Gators VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    72,033
    Likes Received:
    4,880
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Clermont, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +10,298
    on a plane to Africa
    • Like Like x 1
  4. oragator1
    Online

    oragator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    12,916
    Likes Received:
    467
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,844
    This popped up at about 2p while I was at work...it affects how long the debt ceiling fight is delayed, the fight over spending cuts, the future of fannie and freddie (half the surplus was fannie, less likely they will wind them down while they were a cash cow), short and medium term debt projections etc...I saw the story on bloomberg and went to CNN to read more about it and the whole top fold was Zimmerman coverage.
  5. secgator
    Offline

    secgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    10,720
    Likes Received:
    347
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +938
    From obob's posted quote...."For June, the U.S. Treasury Department reported a $117 billion surplus on Thursday, thanks to a continued uptick in revenue and a decline in spending."

    Amazing how that works huh?

    Wonder if any libs actually paid attention to that part? Doubtful.
  6. GatorNorth
    Offline

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,917
    Likes Received:
    288
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Ratings Received:
    +1,063
    Can't you bold the other part and ask the same question in reverse?

    We need both, not in equal proportion but certainly both.
  7. busigator96
    Offline

    busigator96 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    14,999
    Likes Received:
    278
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Gainesville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,045
    as long as we can pay the minimum payment to the big banks the music will keep playing.
  8. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,584
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,949
    Taxes already went up... don't you remember?
  9. dadx4
    Offline

    dadx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    29,941
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Gainesville, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +1,830
    Nice angle OBOB, Hussein is STILL $590BILLION in the hole which is a net increase in the debt. It doesn't matter if you have a month here and there with a little surplus when you are overall $590BILLILON in the whole. Just wait until Hussein Care kicks in, these little surplus stories will VAPORIZE.
  10. oldgator
    Offline

    oldgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +139
    by the same token......wonder if cons actually paid attention to
    or whether ultra cons and ultra libs actually paid attention to
    ultra cons----solution----cut only.
    ultra-libs-----solution----tax everything
    reasonable people-----solution----uptick in revenue and a decline in spending


    I would like to thank the con poster who highlighted the 'decline in spending' without also including the ultra-con attitude that decreasing spending is THE solution without accompanying increase of revenue taken in by govt.

    the spin in the con post against libs is well deserved by ultra libs. But don't forget that cons go the opposite extreme of cutting spending as the only thing needed for a solution.

    points out the stupidity of both ultra cons and ultra libs 'all or nothing' attitude.

    seems the con poster is not so ultra after all since he(or she) did not dispute that uptick in revenue is also essential as a part of the solution as decreasing spending.
  11. oldgator
    Offline

    oldgator Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    13,605
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +139
    I find humorous a lot of comments from conservatives/GOP folk that the govt should handle its budget, etc like us everyday people by cutting spending.

    Don't know about conservatives/GOP folk and their personal and family budgets. But I was taught and practice the following in regards to personal and family budget
    increase revenue(for individual people and families that means money thru work and investments. For govt that means taxes and fees and printing money)
    AND
    spending reasonably(mainly essentials, though thru hard work and smart investing people can buy luxuries, etc....For govt it should be essentials only and no luxuries. But of course what is essential to one party is waste or luxury to opposing party and vice versa)

    family budget does include factoring both revenue and spending. And that both are essential in order to break even or develop a surplus
  12. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,052
    Likes Received:
    595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    I think that's his point.
  13. Row6
    Offline

    Row6 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2009
    Messages:
    15,997
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +26
    Deficits are predicted by the CBO to decline over the next several years but begin to get bad again sometime after 2020, primarily based on Medicare spending. Cutting health care costs - which are even greater for non-Medicare procedures and care - is our number one national budget priority. If we fix that, we are mostly out of the woods for the long term, unknowns aside.
  14. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,318
    Likes Received:
    2,312
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +3,894
    I'm happy that there's some kind of surplus finally. Maybe I'm not a hard-line con in this view but I would agree that the reasonable approach is to decrease spending, not eliminate it. There needs to be a balance of some kind.

    As far as tax hikes, I will give you an example from years ago when I lived in Gainesville. There was a tax increase needed for a specific project (forgive me I don't remember which one - I want to say it was the park at Westside and some other things there). To get it to pass they looked at it and said "we need X dollar amount." They then made a temporary tax hike that literally expired when the project was paid for. Most people voted for it because they saw it was a need AND the money was being put specifically towards that.

    I understand most people, including me, would hate to see a tax increase. But what makes taxpayers angrier is how often our taxes earmarked allegedly for one thing end up elsewhere - pork, pay increases, pet bills, etc. Then when the need arises, they want to increase taxes again....it's a vicious cycle. But if localities would do the same thing as that example, people might vote for more reasonable tax increases and then that'd take some of the burden off the fed's coffers. If people see an end in sight, and that something good's coming out of it, they might be more likely to pay for it. If all they see is waste in every facet of government, from local to federal, then of course no one's going to want an increase.

    I am cautious with this news simply because there is a reason behind it - the Freddie and Fannie situation being a one-time payment comes to mind. If there are one-time payments involved, I don't see how that's a trend. I'm curious to see of those other surplus months how many included any "pay backs" from the bailouts? Now the real question is will that surplus actually go to pay down the mounting debt or is it going to some new pet project or special interest?
  15. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,052
    Likes Received:
    595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    icequeen, noted, but there would have been a surplus in June even without the F&F payment
  16. icequeen
    Offline

    icequeen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2013
    Messages:
    5,318
    Likes Received:
    2,312
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    Ratings Received:
    +3,894
    Thank you for clearing that up. I do still feel that we need to see where the surplus is going to go and we need to see more of these consistently to dig us out of that hole. It means nothing to have extra money if instead of paying your bills you go out for an expensive dinner, for example. The bills will still be there in the morning.
  17. orangeblueorangeblue
    Offline

    orangeblueorangeblue Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    57,052
    Likes Received:
    595
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,878
    We too need to realize that we can't make comparisons to household budgets / personal fiscal policy, too. These are the same people that control the money supply - "money" is, to any government, just a tool for nudging sectors & production.
  18. mdgator05
    Offline

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    6,919
    Likes Received:
    242
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +805
    That is a very reasonable point. There is some econ research that has shown that the decrease in economic growth due to tax increases is much lower when the tax increase is used primarily in pursuit of the goal of deficit reduction.
  19. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    33,584
    Likes Received:
    2,608
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +4,949
    I agree, Ice. However, you and I both know that feeding the hungry tapeworm of government never seems to get enough to eat. There is always (almost always, it seems) 'project-creep'. One project turns into two and three then before we know it that temporary tax is permanent. Didn't toll roads start out that way? Not sure.
  20. dadx4
    Offline

    dadx4 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    29,941
    Likes Received:
    610
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Gainesville, Fl
    Ratings Received:
    +1,830
    lol, 2020, try in the next 36 months.

Share This Page