Is $900Billion new debt fiscally responsible?

[nyker96]

With the new 'deal' on extending Bush tax cuts, now the price tag on it is $900BN and will have to be borrowed money. I mean to ask, how can adding $900BN to the deficit be a fiscally responsible move? How can expanding the deficit by $900BN be a wise decision for the economy!? I mean should people from both parties against this? How can we afford to keep growing this deficit like this!? keep borrowing so much from foreign countries!? I mean doing this, no less, just after an election about the mounting fiscal debt!? Are politicians insane!?

 

[MotF Bane]

No, it's not, they should, we can't, we can't, it's crazy, yes they are.

 

[fskimospy]

The election wasn't about the debt at all, look at the exit polls. The majority of Americans want continued fiscal stimulus into the economy and economists mostly agree.

Our situation isn't good right now, but this policy is likely better than doing nothing. Tax cuts of this nature are some of the least effective stimulus, but you gotta take what you can get.

 

[JSt0rm]

I think its going to be real hard for republicans to honestly run on a platform of fiscal responsibility in the future. The democrats actually want to let the tax cut expire to help with the national debt and the republicans obviously don't care about debt.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Are politicians insane!?

In short, yes.

Idiots on both sides will claim victory and go home.

 

[spidey07]

Tax cuts aren't debt, spending is. Democrats pushed for the insane spending (UI extension), THAT is debt.

Tax cuts aren't spending and they aren't debt. Counting on revenue that isn't there doesn't create debt.

 

[fskimospy]

Tax cuts aren't debt, spending is. Democrats pushed for the insane spending (UI extension), THAT is debt.

Tax cuts aren't spending and they aren't debt. Counting on revenue that isn't there doesn't create debt.

You hear that guys? If you pass a spending bill that includes taxes to pay for it, you get no debt and everything is good.

If next Congress repeals the tax but not the spending, what that really means is that the original spending was what caused the debt, not the tax repeal later. It's all so simple.

Spidey, I know I say this a lot but I really want you to know that I mean it. You are extremely stupid.

 

[CrackRabbit]

Tax cuts aren't debt, spending is. Democrats pushed for the insane spending (UI extension), THAT is debt.

Tax cuts aren't spending and they aren't debt. Counting on revenue that isn't there doesn't create debt.

So you are ok with the fact that instead of letting the tax cuts expire and being able to reduce the existing debt we will now have to have NEW debt on top of the debt that will no longer be paid off because of the tax cuts being renewed?

 

[Attic]

You hear that guys? If you pass a spending bill that includes taxes to pay for it, you get no debt and everything is good.

If next Congress repeals the tax but not the spending, what that really means is that the original spending was what caused the debt, not the tax repeal later. It's all so simple.

Spidey, I know I say this a lot but I really want you to know that I mean it. You are extremely stupid.

So Congress can spend as much as they want as long as they can pay for it? There should be a rolling budget that matches whatever tax rate can pay for spending?


You indicate you know how congress pays for things, but you don't really get it do you?


Acording to your argument i'm gathering you believe fiscal responsibility amounts to raising taxes.

 

[JSt0rm]

90% of the republicans think the rapture is around the corner anyhow. Why would they want to stop spending?

 

[fskimospy]

So Congress can spend as much as they want as long as they can pay for it? There should be a rolling budget that matches whatever tax rate can pay for spending?


You indicate you know how congress pays for things, but you don't really get it do you?


Acording to your argument i'm gathering you believe fiscal responsibility amounts to raising taxes.

What the hell are you talking about? Did you read and comprehend a single thing before you hit post?

Fiscal responsibility in the context of this thread is not having a deficit. This is accomplished by having tax revenues equal expenditures. In order to be fiscally responsible in this way you must include new taxes (or cuts in other spending) to go with any new spending you propose so that the deficit remains zero. Likewise, if you cut taxes, you must reduce spending in order to keep the deficit at zero.

When you cut taxes without cutting spending, you have now taken some or all of certain programs that had themselves paid for by tax receipts and made them no longer paid for. Spidey's argument was that if you remove the funding for a spending plan, it is the spending plan that is the cause of the deficit as opposed to the fact that you just removed the funding.

That is extraordinarily dumb.

 

[JockoJohnson]

What the hell are you talking about? Did you read and comprehend a single thing before you hit post?

Fiscal responsibility in the context of this thread is not having a deficit. This is accomplished by having tax revenues equal expenditures. In order to be fiscally responsible in this way you must include new taxes (or cuts in other spending) to go with any new spending you propose so that the deficit remains zero. Likewise, if you cut taxes, you must reduce spending in order to keep the deficit at zero.

When you cut taxes without cutting spending, you have now taken some or all of certain programs that had themselves paid for by tax receipts and made them no longer paid for. Spidey's argument was that if you remove the funding for a spending plan, it is the spending plan that is the cause of the deficit as opposed to the fact that you just removed the funding.

That is extraordinarily dumb.

I'll admit it, I am a bit lost now. I ask this seriously: Did Congress count on these tax cuts expiring? Did they already spend the money that would come in during 2011 and forward? Otherwise, since the money wasn't already coming in because these tax cuts are in existence, what is the harm in extending them?

 

[fskimospy]

I'll admit it, I am a bit lost now. I ask this seriously: Did Congress count on these tax cuts expiring? Did they already spend the money that would come in during 2011 and forward? Otherwise, since the money wasn't already coming in because these tax cuts are in existence, what is the harm in extending them?

Budget projections going forward were based upon these tax cuts expiring as planned, so budgeting and deficit projections were made counting the extra money the expiration would have provided.

 

[JockoJohnson]

Budget projections going forward were based upon these tax cuts expiring as planned, so budgeting and deficit projections were made counting the extra money the expiration would have provided.

Thank you. Makes sense now and due to that, probably not a good idea then to renew them.

 

[cubby1223]

Even if you want to play the pointless partisan semantics games - at least recognize that the compromise is for a two-year extension of the Bush Tax Cuts - thus THIS WHOLE THREAD IS BASED ON FALSE SENSATIONALIZED NUMBERS!!!!!

 

[cubby1223]

And didn't there used to be a rule that actual news articles had to be linked to?

 

[Fern]

Only in 'liberal land' is not raising taxes the same as increasing spending.

Congress should be much more focused on other revenue. Instead of a commission on deficits, they need a commission on employment. Getting employment back to normal levels would raise a tremendous amount of revenue in income and SS taxes (to mention a few), it would also cut spending substantially (unemployment and Medicaid etc).

They also need to reconsider drilling for oil. 100's of billions in revenue for leasing and royalties fees are there for the taking. It would also mean a lot of jobs (and that revenue too).

Fern

 

[SparkyJJO]

Here's the thing - Americans in general don't need a tax increase to further strain individual budgets. However, we have that insanely huge deficit (which BOTH parties are each partly responsible for) that we need to deal with.

So, what to do?

Well, for starters, cut the budget. Stop spending outside the income level. Just knock it off. I know some people will whine and moan about their pet projects and programs that would need to get the knife, but too bad. Something's gotta give.

There is a ton of wasted money right now. EVERYTHING needs looked at, every dollar expenditure needs re-evaluated. Cut out the crap spending, then look at where the tax revenue vs expenditures are and we'll go from there. I'll bet if the nutjobs in washington really had the mind to do it, and cared to, they could get the budget down below the tax revenue mark without sacrificing anything of importance.

Taxing more to cover excessive spending is what is irresponsible. The only time that a tax cut is irresponsible is when that puts the tax revenue level below what is necessary to cover a reasonable, well-managed budget.

 

[fskimospy]

Only in 'liberal land' is not raising taxes the same as increasing spending.

Congress should be much more focused on other revenue. Instead of a commission on deficits, they need a commission on employment. Getting employment back to normal levels would raise a tremendous amount of revenue in income and SS taxes (to mention a few), it would also cut spending substantially (unemployment and Medicaid etc).

They also need to reconsider drilling for oil. 100's of billions in revenue for leasing and royalties fees are there for the taking. It would also mean a lot of jobs (and that revenue too).

Fern

No one said they were the same thing, what IS being said (and what is undeniably true) is that cutting taxes without cutting spending is the cause of this particular increase in the deficit. Only in Fern-land (and probably Spidey-land) is that difficult to understand.

As for the people who think that the government is filled with waste that we can just cut and somehow balance the budget, you're dreaming. Waste is a politician's greatest friend because it allows them to fund their pet projects without raising taxes or increasing the deficit and so there are people constantly looking for it. I'm sure there's still some around, but nowhere close to the numbers people here think.

 

[Dissipate]

Folks, the system cannot be saved in its current form. Who is in power and what decisions they make mean little at this point. It is like changing captains as the Titanic goes down. That being said, there are soft landings and their are full blown crashes. It looks to me that the political task masters are going for the full blown crash scenario.

 

[piasabird]

Most Americans just want a Job and a paycheck so they are not living on the streets. A Stimulus does not create a job. Employers create jobs. What is really needed is for government to quit spending money on things that are not important. We need things like roads being fixed i.e. potloles. We need to quit bailing out Europe and invest in the USA. Quit giving money to banks and quit bailing out car companies. We also dont need to hand out $8,000 to first time home buyers. We need to cut back on spending and to tell people to go out and find a job instead of sitting on their asses on the goverment dole.

If you kept extending my unemployment for 2 years, I would not go look for a job or take whatever was available. I would just keep sending in the forms and not be motivated. This is just simple human nature. If you pay people to not go look for a job, then they will not do so, neither will they take a low paying job. Maybe when we give extended benefits we should cut back on the amounts every 6 weeks till they are receiving less and less to motivate people.

There are plenty of jobs that are being filled by undocumented illegal workers. Just start turning all those people into the Feds; You dont have anything else to do! Get back at these foreign interlopers. Sure they do some jobs that may not be desirable, but when they take your house and your car then maybe you will get motivated.

 

[IBMer]

No one said they were the same thing, what IS being said (and what is undeniably true) is that cutting taxes without cutting spending is the cause of this particular increase in the deficit. Only in Fern-land (and probably Spidey-land) is that difficult to understand.

Just forget about it Eskimospy. Its their talking points. Tax cuts don't create debt and 50 percent of the population pays 0 taxes. You cannot argue with talking points.

 

[fskimospy]

Most Americans just want a Job and a paycheck so they are not living on the streets. A Stimulus does not create a job. Employers create jobs. What is really needed is for government to quit spending money on things that are not important. We need things like roads being fixed i.e. potloles. We need to quit bailing out Europe and invest in the USA. Quit giving money to banks and quit bailing out car companies. We also dont need to hand out $8,000 to first time home buyers. We need to cut back on spending and to tell people to go out and find a job instead of sitting on their asses on the goverment dole.

If you kept extending my unemployment for 2 years, I would not go look for a job or take whatever was available. I would just keep sending in the forms and not be motivated. This is just simple human nature. If you pay people to not go look for a job, then they will not do so, neither will they take a low paying job. Maybe when we give extended benefits we should cut back on the amounts every 6 weeks till they are receiving less and less to motivate people.

There are plenty of jobs that are being filled by undocumented illegal workers. Just start turning all those people into the Feds; You dont have anything else to do! Get back at these foreign interlopers. Sure they do some jobs that may not be desirable, but when they take your house and your car then maybe you will get motivated.

I'm unaware of any credible economist that believes US unemployment could be solved by the removal of illegal immigrants and that the reason for our pervasive unemployment is that benefits are too generous. (last time I checked it was somewhere around 6 unemployed people for each open position)

 

[Dissipate]

Most Americans just want a Job and a paycheck so they are not living on the streets. A Stimulus does not create a job. Employers create jobs. What is really needed is for government to quit spending money on things that are not important. We need things like roads being fixed i.e. potloles. We need to quit bailing out Europe and invest in the USA. Quit giving money to banks and quit bailing out car companies. We also dont need to hand out $8,000 to first time home buyers. We need to cut back on spending and to tell people to go out and find a job instead of sitting on their asses on the goverment dole.

If you kept extending my unemployment for 2 years, I would not go look for a job or take whatever was available. I would just keep sending in the forms and not be motivated. This is just simple human nature. If you pay people to not go look for a job, then they will not do so, neither will they take a low paying job. Maybe when we give extended benefits we should cut back on the amounts every 6 weeks till they are receiving less and less to motivate people.

There are plenty of jobs that are being filled by undocumented illegal workers. Just start turning all those people into the Feds; You dont have anything else to do! Get back at these foreign interlopers. Sure they do some jobs that may not be desirable, but when they take your house and your car then maybe you will get motivated.

Forget about jobs. What people need to do now is dig in their heals and non-violently crash the system. This means pulling as much money as they can out of the banks etc. to bring this miserable system down. Everyone knows it is pure shit except for the politicians and banking elite. Going back to work will just fill up their cups with more expensive champagne! We should all be thinking about how to rapidly bring this whole system down now!

 

[xj0hnx]

Well, for starters, cut the budget. Stop spending outside the income level. Just knock it off. I know some people will whine and moan about their pet projects and programs that would need to get the knife, but too bad. Something's gotta give.

And there's the rub ...no one wants to. The democrats cry about the republicans, the republicans cry about the democrats, but BOTH keep right on keepin' on business as usual. There is no real accountability in our system, and there's no punishment for politicians fucking everything up, "Opps, I didn't get re-elected, well shucks" They should be thrown in jail if their policies fuck up things like they have in the last decade+, instead they just have to cry "look what the republicans did", or "look what the democrats did".