US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Post by 133743Hokie »

fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
fatman wrote:Highest defecits observed in 6 years. This is the largest jump in defecit outside of recession since fiscal liberal Ronald Reagan was president. Job growth and the stock market have been crushing it for 6-7 years now, but concern over the huge upswing in government defecits are a cause for concern. It appears that the US Govt has moved to a much more fiscally liberal philosophy over the past 12 months.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 5808fbfc2d
Several thoughts...

1- you’re right to be concerned about borrowing, finally.
2- as a liberal, you’ve abdicated any & all privilege to whine about debt. Ever.
3- Reagan’s deficit spending saved us a TON of money by ending the Cold War.
4- I’m thinking the growth we are seeing now will create a LOT of government revenue.
5- job growth hasn’t been “crushing it” for 6 years, unless one sees MacServing as a career. President fast food jobs didn’t create any job growth.
6- spending. It is. ALL about government spending run amok.

Good to see you stop by.
No malice, here.
1)You couldn't be more wrong. I've been consistently focused on deficit spending, I'm a big fan of the most fiscally conservative Pres on my lifetime Bill Clinton and his Pay/Go mechanism for controlling the deficit. I think a more accurate statement would be that you ceased to care about the deficit once your party controlled every brach of the Fed Gov't.

2) Expressing concern about out of control gov't spending makes one a "liberal" in your book. Pretty telling statement that says alot about your worldview.

3)LOL @ reduction in DoD spending resulting from Reagan's deficit spending. I'm curious when we can expect to see that materialize? Its been 30 years and DoD spending continues to be completely out of control, curious why you believe there was a peace dividend.

4/5)The deficit calcs include the projected increase in Gov't revenue from "growth." I'll repeat, we are 6-7 years into a bull market and job creation stats are on the same trend line they've been on for years.
http://politicalwire.com/wp-content/upl ... 065179.png
I give Trump/Obama equal credit for that, since they both operate on the same trajectory of payroll growth and reduction in unemployment.

6) Couldn't agree more that Gov't spending is out of control. I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but a tax cut without a similar cut in spending = stacking more onto the already massive deficit. Another reason, pay/go was so successful for Fiscal Conservative Bill Clinton. Under Pay/Go, this tax cut would need to be paid for by similar cuts to spending.

Thanks for the kind words. I maintain my steadfast support for balanced budgets and deficit reductions regardless of which fiscally liberal party we have running the show in DC.
Wow! Where to begin.

Clinton was not a fiscal conservative.

Clinton used the "peace dividend" to gut the military by significantly reducing their spending.
Now I’m really confused. I’m responding to a thread explaining that explaining that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending crushed the ussr paving the way for reduced spending on DoD spending later. Are you now saying that Reagan’s deficit spending didn’t pay dividends later on?

Clinton isn’t a perfect fiscal conservative, but I’d challenge you to name a more fiscally conservative president than him in the past 40 years.
Reagan's increased defense spending certainly was key to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in the late 80s. Unfortunately Clinton misread the world and instead of solidifying and maintaining our stance as the sole superpower, he used diminishing our national defense as a means of deficit reduction. So while the debt was reduced the world exploded. It was a very narrow minded and short sighted political move on his part.

As for Clinton's fiscal bonifides, the republican congress reined him in. He triangulated and acquiesced for political reasons. He fought tooth and nail to continue government and entitlement program spending.
fatman
Posts: 2439
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 2:18 am

Re: US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Post by fatman »

133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
fatman wrote:Highest defecits observed in 6 years. This is the largest jump in defecit outside of recession since fiscal liberal Ronald Reagan was president. Job growth and the stock market have been crushing it for 6-7 years now, but concern over the huge upswing in government defecits are a cause for concern. It appears that the US Govt has moved to a much more fiscally liberal philosophy over the past 12 months.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... 5808fbfc2d
Several thoughts...

1- you’re right to be concerned about borrowing, finally.
2- as a liberal, you’ve abdicated any & all privilege to whine about debt. Ever.
3- Reagan’s deficit spending saved us a TON of money by ending the Cold War.
4- I’m thinking the growth we are seeing now will create a LOT of government revenue.
5- job growth hasn’t been “crushing it” for 6 years, unless one sees MacServing as a career. President fast food jobs didn’t create any job growth.
6- spending. It is. ALL about government spending run amok.

Good to see you stop by.
No malice, here.
1)You couldn't be more wrong. I've been consistently focused on deficit spending, I'm a big fan of the most fiscally conservative Pres on my lifetime Bill Clinton and his Pay/Go mechanism for controlling the deficit. I think a more accurate statement would be that you ceased to care about the deficit once your party controlled every brach of the Fed Gov't.

2) Expressing concern about out of control gov't spending makes one a "liberal" in your book. Pretty telling statement that says alot about your worldview.

3)LOL @ reduction in DoD spending resulting from Reagan's deficit spending. I'm curious when we can expect to see that materialize? Its been 30 years and DoD spending continues to be completely out of control, curious why you believe there was a peace dividend.

4/5)The deficit calcs include the projected increase in Gov't revenue from "growth." I'll repeat, we are 6-7 years into a bull market and job creation stats are on the same trend line they've been on for years.
http://politicalwire.com/wp-content/upl ... 065179.png
I give Trump/Obama equal credit for that, since they both operate on the same trajectory of payroll growth and reduction in unemployment.

6) Couldn't agree more that Gov't spending is out of control. I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but a tax cut without a similar cut in spending = stacking more onto the already massive deficit. Another reason, pay/go was so successful for Fiscal Conservative Bill Clinton. Under Pay/Go, this tax cut would need to be paid for by similar cuts to spending.

Thanks for the kind words. I maintain my steadfast support for balanced budgets and deficit reductions regardless of which fiscally liberal party we have running the show in DC.
Wow! Where to begin.

Clinton was not a fiscal conservative.

Clinton used the "peace dividend" to gut the military by significantly reducing their spending.
Now I’m really confused. I’m responding to a thread explaining that explaining that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending crushed the ussr paving the way for reduced spending on DoD spending later. Are you now saying that Reagan’s deficit spending didn’t pay dividends later on?

Clinton isn’t a perfect fiscal conservative, but I’d challenge you to name a more fiscally conservative president than him in the past 40 years.
Reagan's increased defense spending certainly was key to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in the late 80s. Unfortunately Clinton misread the world and instead of solidifying and maintaining our stance as the sole superpower, he used diminishing our national defense as a means of deficit reduction. So while the debt was reduced the world exploded. It was a very narrow minded and short sighted political move on his part.

As for Clinton's fiscal bonifides, the republican congress reined him in. He triangulated and acquiesced for political reasons. He fought tooth and nail to continue government and entitlement program spending.
I’m confused. I just read that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending was OK, because it set up conditions to cut defense spending. However, I’m also reading that Clinton’s spending cuts on DoD were disastrous. So which is it?

Clinton was a huge proponent of payGo balancing spending increases with cuts elsewhere.

Name a president in the past 40 years with a more fiscally conservative record than bubba?
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Post by awesome guy »

fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote: Several thoughts...

1- you’re right to be concerned about borrowing, finally.
2- as a liberal, you’ve abdicated any & all privilege to whine about debt. Ever.
3- Reagan’s deficit spending saved us a TON of money by ending the Cold War.
4- I’m thinking the growth we are seeing now will create a LOT of government revenue.
5- job growth hasn’t been “crushing it” for 6 years, unless one sees MacServing as a career. President fast food jobs didn’t create any job growth.
6- spending. It is. ALL about government spending run amok.

Good to see you stop by.
No malice, here.
1)You couldn't be more wrong. I've been consistently focused on deficit spending, I'm a big fan of the most fiscally conservative Pres on my lifetime Bill Clinton and his Pay/Go mechanism for controlling the deficit. I think a more accurate statement would be that you ceased to care about the deficit once your party controlled every brach of the Fed Gov't.

2) Expressing concern about out of control gov't spending makes one a "liberal" in your book. Pretty telling statement that says alot about your worldview.

3)LOL @ reduction in DoD spending resulting from Reagan's deficit spending. I'm curious when we can expect to see that materialize? Its been 30 years and DoD spending continues to be completely out of control, curious why you believe there was a peace dividend.

4/5)The deficit calcs include the projected increase in Gov't revenue from "growth." I'll repeat, we are 6-7 years into a bull market and job creation stats are on the same trend line they've been on for years.
http://politicalwire.com/wp-content/upl ... 065179.png
I give Trump/Obama equal credit for that, since they both operate on the same trajectory of payroll growth and reduction in unemployment.

6) Couldn't agree more that Gov't spending is out of control. I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but a tax cut without a similar cut in spending = stacking more onto the already massive deficit. Another reason, pay/go was so successful for Fiscal Conservative Bill Clinton. Under Pay/Go, this tax cut would need to be paid for by similar cuts to spending.

Thanks for the kind words. I maintain my steadfast support for balanced budgets and deficit reductions regardless of which fiscally liberal party we have running the show in DC.
Wow! Where to begin.

Clinton was not a fiscal conservative.

Clinton used the "peace dividend" to gut the military by significantly reducing their spending.
Now I’m really confused. I’m responding to a thread explaining that explaining that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending crushed the ussr paving the way for reduced spending on DoD spending later. Are you now saying that Reagan’s deficit spending didn’t pay dividends later on?

Clinton isn’t a perfect fiscal conservative, but I’d challenge you to name a more fiscally conservative president than him in the past 40 years.
Reagan's increased defense spending certainly was key to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in the late 80s. Unfortunately Clinton misread the world and instead of solidifying and maintaining our stance as the sole superpower, he used diminishing our national defense as a means of deficit reduction. So while the debt was reduced the world exploded. It was a very narrow minded and short sighted political move on his part.

As for Clinton's fiscal bonifides, the republican congress reined him in. He triangulated and acquiesced for political reasons. He fought tooth and nail to continue government and entitlement program spending.
I’m confused. I just read that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending was OK, because it set up conditions to cut defense spending. However, I’m also reading that Clinton’s spending cuts on DoD were disastrous. So which is it?

Clinton was a huge proponent of payGo balancing spending increases with cuts elsewhere.

Name a president in the past 40 years with a more fiscally conservative record than bubba?
Clinton was anything but that. You're hysterical!
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Post by 133743Hokie »

fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
Several thoughts...

1- you’re right to be concerned about borrowing, finally.
2- as a liberal, you’ve abdicated any & all privilege to whine about debt. Ever.
3- Reagan’s deficit spending saved us a TON of money by ending the Cold War.
4- I’m thinking the growth we are seeing now will create a LOT of government revenue.
5- job growth hasn’t been “crushing it” for 6 years, unless one sees MacServing as a career. President fast food jobs didn’t create any job growth.
6- spending. It is. ALL about government spending run amok.

Good to see you stop by.
No malice, here.
1)You couldn't be more wrong. I've been consistently focused on deficit spending, I'm a big fan of the most fiscally conservative Pres on my lifetime Bill Clinton and his Pay/Go mechanism for controlling the deficit. I think a more accurate statement would be that you ceased to care about the deficit once your party controlled every brach of the Fed Gov't.

2) Expressing concern about out of control gov't spending makes one a "liberal" in your book. Pretty telling statement that says alot about your worldview.

3)LOL @ reduction in DoD spending resulting from Reagan's deficit spending. I'm curious when we can expect to see that materialize? Its been 30 years and DoD spending continues to be completely out of control, curious why you believe there was a peace dividend.

4/5)The deficit calcs include the projected increase in Gov't revenue from "growth." I'll repeat, we are 6-7 years into a bull market and job creation stats are on the same trend line they've been on for years.
http://politicalwire.com/wp-content/upl ... 065179.png
I give Trump/Obama equal credit for that, since they both operate on the same trajectory of payroll growth and reduction in unemployment.

6) Couldn't agree more that Gov't spending is out of control. I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but a tax cut without a similar cut in spending = stacking more onto the already massive deficit. Another reason, pay/go was so successful for Fiscal Conservative Bill Clinton. Under Pay/Go, this tax cut would need to be paid for by similar cuts to spending.

Thanks for the kind words. I maintain my steadfast support for balanced budgets and deficit reductions regardless of which fiscally liberal party we have running the show in DC.
Wow! Where to begin.

Clinton was not a fiscal conservative.

Clinton used the "peace dividend" to gut the military by significantly reducing their spending.
Now I’m really confused. I’m responding to a thread explaining that explaining that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending crushed the ussr paving the way for reduced spending on DoD spending later. Are you now saying that Reagan’s deficit spending didn’t pay dividends later on?

Clinton isn’t a perfect fiscal conservative, but I’d challenge you to name a more fiscally conservative president than him in the past 40 years.
Reagan's increased defense spending certainly was key to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in the late 80s. Unfortunately Clinton misread the world and instead of solidifying and maintaining our stance as the sole superpower, he used diminishing our national defense as a means of deficit reduction. So while the debt was reduced the world exploded. It was a very narrow minded and short sighted political move on his part.

As for Clinton's fiscal bonifides, the republican congress reined him in. He triangulated and acquiesced for political reasons. He fought tooth and nail to continue government and entitlement program spending.
I’m confused. I just read that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending was OK, because it set up conditions to cut defense spending. However, I’m also reading that Clinton’s spending cuts on DoD were disastrous. So which is it?

Clinton was a huge proponent of payGo balancing spending increases with cuts elsewhere.

Name a president in the past 40 years with a more fiscally conservative record than bubba?
You didn't read that from me so don't pose that question to me. Again, you're avoiding the point made. Oh, and PayGo was congressional legislation that Clinton fought so I'm not sure how you get that he was a huge proponent of it.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: US Govt to borrow 84% more in 18 than 17

Post by awesome guy »

133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
fatman wrote: 1)You couldn't be more wrong. I've been consistently focused on deficit spending, I'm a big fan of the most fiscally conservative Pres on my lifetime Bill Clinton and his Pay/Go mechanism for controlling the deficit. I think a more accurate statement would be that you ceased to care about the deficit once your party controlled every brach of the Fed Gov't.

2) Expressing concern about out of control gov't spending makes one a "liberal" in your book. Pretty telling statement that says alot about your worldview.

3)LOL @ reduction in DoD spending resulting from Reagan's deficit spending. I'm curious when we can expect to see that materialize? Its been 30 years and DoD spending continues to be completely out of control, curious why you believe there was a peace dividend.

4/5)The deficit calcs include the projected increase in Gov't revenue from "growth." I'll repeat, we are 6-7 years into a bull market and job creation stats are on the same trend line they've been on for years.
http://politicalwire.com/wp-content/upl ... 065179.png
I give Trump/Obama equal credit for that, since they both operate on the same trajectory of payroll growth and reduction in unemployment.

6) Couldn't agree more that Gov't spending is out of control. I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but a tax cut without a similar cut in spending = stacking more onto the already massive deficit. Another reason, pay/go was so successful for Fiscal Conservative Bill Clinton. Under Pay/Go, this tax cut would need to be paid for by similar cuts to spending.

Thanks for the kind words. I maintain my steadfast support for balanced budgets and deficit reductions regardless of which fiscally liberal party we have running the show in DC.
Wow! Where to begin.

Clinton was not a fiscal conservative.

Clinton used the "peace dividend" to gut the military by significantly reducing their spending.
Now I’m really confused. I’m responding to a thread explaining that explaining that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending crushed the ussr paving the way for reduced spending on DoD spending later. Are you now saying that Reagan’s deficit spending didn’t pay dividends later on?

Clinton isn’t a perfect fiscal conservative, but I’d challenge you to name a more fiscally conservative president than him in the past 40 years.
Reagan's increased defense spending certainly was key to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war in the late 80s. Unfortunately Clinton misread the world and instead of solidifying and maintaining our stance as the sole superpower, he used diminishing our national defense as a means of deficit reduction. So while the debt was reduced the world exploded. It was a very narrow minded and short sighted political move on his part.

As for Clinton's fiscal bonifides, the republican congress reined him in. He triangulated and acquiesced for political reasons. He fought tooth and nail to continue government and entitlement program spending.
I’m confused. I just read that Reagan’s explosive deficit spending was OK, because it set up conditions to cut defense spending. However, I’m also reading that Clinton’s spending cuts on DoD were disastrous. So which is it?

Clinton was a huge proponent of payGo balancing spending increases with cuts elsewhere.

Name a president in the past 40 years with a more fiscally conservative record than bubba?
You didn't read that from me so don't pose that question to me. Again, you're avoiding the point made. Oh, and PayGo was congressional legislation that Clinton fought so I'm not sure how you get that he was a huge proponent of it.
He was forced into lip service for it after the 94 midterms.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Post Reply