Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!
  1. Folks, some of you have asked if we were trimming our forums since there are no sports at the moment. We’re going to keep everything open on the forums to provide a sense of normalcy here. It’s our hope Gator Country can be a place of comfort for you during these crazy times. Be safe my friends and take care. -Ray and the GC staff. GO GATORS IN AL KINDS OF WEATHER!

    PS. If you happen to find yourself in tight financial circumstances with regards to renewing here please reach out to us. We’d be happy to help sort it out.

Why Do My Fellow Republicans Make Excuses for Trump’s Deficits?

Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by studegator, Feb 19, 2020.

  1. cluckugator

    cluckugator VIP Member

    999
    378
    408
    Aug 16, 2007
    At least the typos show I am busy!!!
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,166
    539
    658
    Dec 9, 2010
    Mark Sanford is the Republican former Governor and Congressman from South Carolina. He is not a liberal by any stretch of the term. 0/1.

    Possibly the reason you need to remind people of this is because it is false and most people don't believe the false things that you are saying. Here is the budget projection put out by the CBO. The projected deficit in 2019 was $601 billion, not $1 trillion. It was $1.297 trillion in 2026, not $1.5 trillion. The CBO does not project annual deficits out to 2036. They release a long-term budget outlook, but it does not contain annual deficit readings. So 0/4 on factual claims.

    https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52480-ltbo.pdf

    Already pointed out how this is false, as that was not the CBO projection.

    He is not discussing Bernie Sanders proposals, so it would be weird for him to do so, even if you would prefer it.

    Factually false. $5 trillion or so per year in extra spending could be covered by increased taxes. The wisdom of doing that is another issue, but the US economy is considerably larger than you apparently think it is. 0/5.

    Changing the subject to avoid a subject you would rather not discuss: that the person you support massively increased the deficit during a growing economy.

    Who ran the House from 2017-2018? Pretty sure it was Paul Ryan that was speaker. They were in charge of passing the bills that exploded the deficit. 0/6 on factual claims

    Who in the world proposed an immediate $1 trillion surplus? Quite a strawman there. Most people are comfortable with some level of debt. Some level of debt is not an issue in smart financial management. The issue is that deficits shouldn't be increasing as the economy is growing, and they are.

    Imagine telling you from 2012 that you would be arguing debt for economic performance.

    Regardless, you made at least 6 factually false claims in this post. You should clean that up.
     
    • Winner Winner x 6
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  3. FearNoSpear

    FearNoSpear GC Hall of Fame

    7,478
    278
    293
    Apr 9, 2007
    Ocala
    It doesnt. Otherwise I would have tried it by now
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  4. g8rjd

    g8rjd GC Hall of Fame

    7,396
    320
    188
    Jan 20, 2008
    Tallahassee, FL
    Tangent, but is the Kool-Aid man’s face on the pitcher or floating in the liquid inside the pitcher?

    Yes, these are the thoughts that keep me awake at night...
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  5. gatorknights

    gatorknights GC Hall of Fame

    23,480
    1,882
    1,243
    Apr 8, 2007
    Gainesville, FL
    I've always wondered that myself :D. Cheers!!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    Savage.
     
  7. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    9,579
    1,386
    1,373
    Apr 3, 2007
    This is the practical solution. Economic growth and inflation.
     
  8. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    5,109
    1,204
    548
    Sep 20, 2014
    Florida/North Carolina
    Don’t confuse them with facts. I mean, these are people who think Trump is the nation’s highest law enforcement officer and can direct DOJ who to prosecute and who to lay off of. Facts and respect for our Constitution and traditions are meaningless. I don’t think it’s too harsh to say these people are despicable and un-American.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  9. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    5,109
    1,204
    548
    Sep 20, 2014
    Florida/North Carolina
    Yes it was, and it falls on deaf ears. Even the democratic candidates are largely ignoring it.
     
  10. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    13,178
    464
    633
    Apr 3, 2007
    Exactly. The difference is QE wouldn't save the next President.
     
  11. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    5,109
    1,204
    548
    Sep 20, 2014
    Florida/North Carolina
    The author is a South Carolina Republican. Is it possible for you to make an argument without framing it as “we reasonable people” vs “lefties”? You’re not being persuasive with that approach, just offputting.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    5,109
    1,204
    548
    Sep 20, 2014
    Florida/North Carolina
    Touche!
     
  13. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    5,109
    1,204
    548
    Sep 20, 2014
    Florida/North Carolina
    Classic!
     
  14. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer Premium Member

    4,614
    1,416
    1,128
    Oct 30, 2017
    A couple big issues with your claims:
    1. The January 2017 CBO estimates doesn't estimate the first trillion dollar deficit until 2023.
    2. The Democrats didn't gain control of the House until 2019.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    13,178
    464
    633
    Apr 3, 2007
    I won't try to reply to that mdgator05. It's starting to look like a coronavirus.

    I'm sorry I got the 2019 numbers wrong. My memory is not what it used to be and I should have doubled checked those numbers. But I was correct in the post decade projections except the CBO projected those out 30 years, not 20 years. So I compared those numbers to the last one they released back in January. Very interesting numbers, actually more startling than the ones back in 1/2017.

    Projections 1/2017 (2019 - 2027):

    -601 -684 -797 -959 -1,000 -1,027 -1,165 -1,297 -1,408

    Projections 1/2020 (2019 - 2029)

    -984 -1,015 -1,000 -1,116 -1,119 -1,152 -1,315 -1,333 -1,313 -1,538 -1,466

    Even with the tax cuts, the bottom line is the deficits are similar. Comparing 2018-2027 (the years that overlap), the 1/2017 projected total deficits of $9.426T. I then took a look at the same projections with the 2020 projections and the total deficits are $9.153T. The Trump tax cuts have no affect on total deficits over the same period.

    Let me explain why that is. For all of the political posturing by both parties, we take in similar tax revenue per GDP. In the years since 1913, in no year did we ever break 20% tax revenue to GDP. Not during the Great Depression, not before WWII, not during WWII, and never after WWII. We came close on 3 occasions - 1944 (19.5%), 45 (19.8%), and 2000 (19.75%). 1944 and 1945 were the years we implemented the 90% upper tax bracket. Historically, it has averaged 17.4% and the range has been between 13.15% in 1950 to 19.75% in 2000. Trump's tenure so far is about 1% lower than the historical average.

    Most people are not comfortable with $20T+ in debt especially when we have had a deficit since 2001. After Clinton, the debt was at $5T and after Obama it was at $20T. The issue is interest on that debt. Rates are cheap now, but not forever. In our lifetimes, we will see double, maybe triple the rates we have today. Interest on Debt is paid above everything else so total debt is a concern even if deficits are 0. The reason I brought up $1T a year was to highlight how long it would take to pay down debt to the levels they were before Obama - 12 years. Keep in mind we are at near historic levels of debt to GDP and within 30 years will see debt-to-GDP at 120% far exceeding the previous high after WWII.

    Also, you made a crucial mistake that I have caught most liberals on - your assumptions suck. Case in point,

    Who do you think I meant? I never once said anything about "who" ran the House just that the House would never pass austerity. And since any austerity bill has to start in the House, it would never make it to the Senate. No way would any republican pass a tax hike plus spending cuts in 2017. What do you think I am, stupid? The damn midterms were just coming up. It would have doomed every republican in the House (increase taxes = republicans flip you off at the polls and cut spending = democrats flip you off at the polls). Austerity will never, ever work in the US because it would kill the economy and no candidate will ever get elected on that policy. I wished it would work but I don't see ever a way to turn a $1T deficit into a $1T surplus and use it to pay down debt for 12 years just to return to the level it was after Bush.

    Also, you didn't even back your assessment with facts, except for Point 1. I shake your hand on that one, because you are correct. But the others, you just state an opinion and then dock me on it without ever backing it up with facts.

    BTW, as I've already said, Bernie will never be able to find $5T in taxes on top of what we already have. He could bleed another $830B per year but anymore than that will put us in a place the country has never been in. I bring up Bernie because he's the democratic front runner as of now. If Pete passes him then I'll pick on him:) Unlike you, I don't see Trump as the slam dunk winner in November. It will be another very very close race. Now if the economy tanks before then, it won't be close.
     
  16. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    13,178
    464
    633
    Apr 3, 2007
    Or maybe I should have said RINO. I'm stuck on lefties because of how far left they have gone. I never thought I would say I miss the days of Bill Clinton. So, I will refrain from saying lefties or libbies or leftists and if I'm caught saying it, beer is on me if we ever meet.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  17. RealGatorFan

    RealGatorFan Premium Member

    13,178
    464
    633
    Apr 3, 2007
    Hey, no double tapping!! mdgator05 was 1st!:)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    5,247
    913
    733
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    You and I agree on so much on these boards. And then you go and do something like this. Despicable.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  19. mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    7,166
    539
    658
    Dec 9, 2010
    Assuming that those numbers are correct, you think a combined extra $1.2 trillion over the next 5 years is not much different?

    I'm sorry, but there is literally nothing about Mark Sanford that suggests "liberal." Here are the voting scorecards for him based on his voting record. At what point would you say he is liberal?

    Candidate Profile for Mark Sanford
     
  20. sierragator

    sierragator GC Hall of Fame

    8,414
    453
    358
    Apr 8, 2007
    In the new lexicon anyone who differs from Trump is a liberal and by extension not a real American. You either love Trump or you hate America.....just ask Hannity.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1