WASHINGTON — The federal government’s annual budget deficit is set to widen significantly in the next few years, topping $1 trillion in 2020 despite healthy economic growth, according to new projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
The national debt, which has topped $21 trillion, is expected to soar to more than $33 trillion in 2028. By then, debt held by the public will almost match the size of the nation’s economy, reaching 96 percent of gross domestic product, a higher level than any point since just after World War II and well past the level that economists say could court a crisis.
The new C.B.O. projection is the first since President Trump signed a tax cut that is expected to cost the government nearly $1.9 trillion over 11 years, then signed legislation to significantly boost military and domestic spending over the next two years. The figures are sobering, even in a political climate where deficit concerns appear to be receding.
Emphasis mine; this is a nice way of saying, "Hey, deficit hawk Republicans, where the fuck are you even?"
we're trying to save our phony baloney jobs by simultaneously pandering to our insane base and giving all of everyone else's money to people who don't need it!
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Actual Deficit Hawks are unicorns. They never really existed. It was just a dog-whistle that said "We don't want to allow government benefits to those people."
"A political climate where deficit concerns appear to be receding" is a really interesting way to say "Republicans willfully mislead voters on the importance of the deficit when they're not in power to get votes, knowing full well that a: they don't actually have to do anything about it as long as they funnel enough money to their donors, and b: that if they reduce the deficit then it will become harder to complain about how high it's gotten to win more votes"
+17
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Actual Deficit Hawks are unicorns. They never really existed. It was just a dog-whistle that said "We don't want to allow government benefits to those people."
Oh I don't doubt it. This is just another situation where the so-called hawks are having their true colors shown.
WASHINGTON — The federal government’s annual budget deficit is set to widen significantly in the next few years, topping $1 trillion in 2020 despite healthy economic growth, according to new projections from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.
The national debt, which has topped $21 trillion, is expected to soar to more than $33 trillion in 2028. By then, debt held by the public will almost match the size of the nation’s economy, reaching 96 percent of gross domestic product, a higher level than any point since just after World War II and well past the level that economists say could court a crisis.
The new C.B.O. projection is the first since President Trump signed a tax cut that is expected to cost the government nearly $1.9 trillion over 11 years, then signed legislation to significantly boost military and domestic spending over the next two years. The figures are sobering, even in a political climate where deficit concerns appear to be receding.
Emphasis mine; this is a nice way of saying, "Hey, deficit hawk Republicans, where the fuck are you even?"
I'm pretty sure that deficit hawk Republicans don't exist; it was just a nicer way of saying they didn't want poor people to get money from the government. In reality, Republicans spend, spend, spend, usually on things like idiotic wars.
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
Yeah, deficit hawkery exists to be a weapon against Democratic priorities that sounds reasonable to elite morons who work in the media.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+21
Options
HenroidMexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered Userregular
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
I have a morbid curiosity as to how they will spin this to be their opponents' fault. The opponents who voted no on the bill they had no hand in crafting, let alone had a chance to read before it was going to vote.
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
I have a morbid curiosity as to how they will spin this to be their opponents' fault. The opponents who voted no on the bill they had no hand in crafting, let alone had a chance to read before it was going to vote.
The tactic that usually works is that it lies in the weeds until a Democrat is in office. Usually they don't get to cut services after they blow up the deficit with tax cuts, but then they can campaign against "tax hikes" when Democrats try to spend money or raise taxes. And in fact because the Democrats are well known as profligate spenders, they can force Democrats to cut services. Which the GOP then runs on.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+8
Options
ElJeffeNot actually a mod.Roaming the streets, waving his gun around.Moderator, ClubPAmod
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
I have a morbid curiosity as to how they will spin this to be their opponents' fault. The opponents who voted no on the bill they had no hand in crafting, let alone had a chance to read before it was going to vote.
"The deficit is huge because of wasteful spending on Obamacare and social security and welfare. The landmark pro growth tax cuts that we passed - and that democrats opposed - boosted our economy, which kept the deficits from being as large as they otherwise would be. Democrats now want to ruin our economy with tax hikes that have been proven to discourage work and decrease tax revenues, but the real solution is to stop giving handouts to people who refuse to work, while cutting taxes on the corporations and investors that drive our economy."
ElJeffe on
I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
Oh no, they’re not going to ignore the deficit. It will not be acknowledged as a revenue issue, though- this is going to be the reason given as to why we need to slash health care spending and other programs even more, while also ramping up military spending.
I have a morbid curiosity as to how they will spin this to be their opponents' fault. The opponents who voted no on the bill they had no hand in crafting, let alone had a chance to read before it was going to vote.
"The deficit is huge because of wasteful spending on Obamacare and social security and welfare. The landmark pro growth tax cuts that we passed - and that democrats opposed - boosted our economy, which kept the deficits from being as large as they otherwise would be. Democrats now want to ruin our economy with tax hikes that have been proven to discourage work and decrease tax revenues, but the real solution is to stop giving handouts to people who refuse to work, while cutting taxes on the corporations and investors that drive our economy."
I hate that I could see this being tweeted out verbatim by every R Congressperson next time a D is in the driver's seat.
Actual Deficit Hawks are unicorns. They never really existed. It was just a dog-whistle that said "We don't want to allow government benefits to those people."
No, they're Democrats. Obama et. al. actually wanted to, and did, pay for their proposals. Because they care about the long term viability of things. "Tax and spend liberals" is just a way to make responsibility and fiscal probity into a pejorative.
Actual Deficit Hawks are unicorns. They never really existed. It was just a dog-whistle that said "We don't want to allow government benefits to those people."
Any real deficit hawks would be all about raising taxes. You can cut all you want, but that's not going to get you enough to pay off the debt without new/higher taxes.
Actual Deficit Hawks are unicorns. They never really existed. It was just a dog-whistle that said "We don't want to allow government benefits to those people."
Any real deficit hawks would be all about raising taxes. You can cut all you want, but that's not going to get you enough to pay off the debt without new/higher taxes.
There's a reason the smarter people on financial independence subreddits/sites have "MAKE MORE MONEY" as the #1 piece of advice, before any cuts whatsoever.
There are semi-principled deficit hawks for the Republicans, but obviously there aren't that many or the budget wouldn't have passed. Also, they're mostly only deficit hawks if it means cutting spending, but not so much for raising taxes.
I didn't quickly find an equivalent source citing reasons for the Republican senator defections, but you can pretty much assume all of the ones who voted nay were also concerned about the effect the budget would have on the deficit.
So they had an event to tout their tax cuts, except it just highlighted the only benefit people really got was the shitty bread crumbs they won't get this year from their corporate masters?
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So they had an event to tout their tax cuts, except it just highlighted the only benefit people really got was the shitty bread crumbs they won't get this year from their corporate masters?
If I didn't know better, I'd say someone behind the scenes picked those specific stories to deflate the narrative.
There's no plan, there's no race to be run
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Posts
we're trying to save our phony baloney jobs by simultaneously pandering to our insane base and giving all of everyone else's money to people who don't need it!
I'm pretty sure that deficit hawk Republicans don't exist; it was just a nicer way of saying they didn't want poor people to get money from the government. In reality, Republicans spend, spend, spend, usually on things like idiotic wars.
Yeah, deficit hawkery exists to be a weapon against Democratic priorities that sounds reasonable to elite morons who work in the media.
The tactic that usually works is that it lies in the weeds until a Democrat is in office. Usually they don't get to cut services after they blow up the deficit with tax cuts, but then they can campaign against "tax hikes" when Democrats try to spend money or raise taxes. And in fact because the Democrats are well known as profligate spenders, they can force Democrats to cut services. Which the GOP then runs on.
"The deficit is huge because of wasteful spending on Obamacare and social security and welfare. The landmark pro growth tax cuts that we passed - and that democrats opposed - boosted our economy, which kept the deficits from being as large as they otherwise would be. Democrats now want to ruin our economy with tax hikes that have been proven to discourage work and decrease tax revenues, but the real solution is to stop giving handouts to people who refuse to work, while cutting taxes on the corporations and investors that drive our economy."
I hate that I could see this being tweeted out verbatim by every R Congressperson next time a D is in the driver's seat.
No, they're Democrats. Obama et. al. actually wanted to, and did, pay for their proposals. Because they care about the long term viability of things. "Tax and spend liberals" is just a way to make responsibility and fiscal probity into a pejorative.
Any real deficit hawks would be all about raising taxes. You can cut all you want, but that's not going to get you enough to pay off the debt without new/higher taxes.
There's a reason the smarter people on financial independence subreddits/sites have "MAKE MORE MONEY" as the #1 piece of advice, before any cuts whatsoever.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/twenty-republican-congressmen-just-voted-against-the-gop-budget-heres-why
I didn't quickly find an equivalent source citing reasons for the Republican senator defections, but you can pretty much assume all of the ones who voted nay were also concerned about the effect the budget would have on the deficit.
https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/02/09/see-how-your-lawmakers-voted-on-the-budget-bill/
So they had an event to tout their tax cuts, except it just highlighted the only benefit people really got was the shitty bread crumbs they won't get this year from their corporate masters?
pleasepaypreacher.net
If I didn't know better, I'd say someone behind the scenes picked those specific stories to deflate the narrative.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.