Majority of Americans not happy with new tax law.

[1bad65]

Federal govt tax revenue Reagan years

After the tax cuts

FY 1988 - $909 billion.
FY 1987 - $854 billion.
FY 1986 - $769 billion.
FY 1985 - $734 billion.
FY 1984 - $666 billion.
FY 1983 - $601 billion.
FY 1982 - $618 billion.
FY 1981 - $599 billion.
FY 1980 - $517 billion.

https://www.thebalance.com/current-u...evenue-3305762

You guys confuse tax revenues with budget deficits

Even an increase in tax revenue will result in budget deficits if you don't cut spending

Oh Lord.

Just when you think they can't get any more ignorant, they lower the bar.

Let me guess, despite illustrating his ignorance for all to see, that idiot somehow thought he was winning, right?

[The Big Dunn]

You guys are not (intentionally or unintentionally) seeing the whole picture.

Spending in excess of revenue creates deficits. Therefore, if the government's overall revenue is lower (as a result of lower taxes) than its spending a deficit is generated. This is simple high school economics.

Tax cuts = less revenue to the treasury

The government has borrow to fund the deficit and then pay interest on those borrowings.

Tax breaks are great short term economic stimulus but eventually you have to pay it back.

I noticed that everyone who disagreed with BG wouldn't respond to this post.

During Reagan's presidency, the national debt grew from $997 billion in FY1981 to $2.85 trillion in FY1989 and the U.S. went from being the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor in under eight years.

The debt accumulation combined with the weakened economy produced a brief recession.

What is really crazy is Reagan himself described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency. Yet 1bad doesn't mention this when he talks about those tax cuts.

I wonder why????

[1bad65]

You guys confuse tax revenues with budget deficits

Even an increase in tax revenue will result in budget deficits if you don't cut spending

Gruber didn't call them stupid for nothing.

[BrometheusBob.]

You guys confuse tax revenues with budget deficits

Even an increase in tax revenue will result in budget deficits

Only if you spend more.

If spending stays the same, an increase in tax revenues will necessarily lead to a lower deficit.

Similarly, with spending held constant, a decrease in tax revenues will necessarily lead to a higher deficit.

[BrometheusBob.]

I noticed that everyone who disagreed with BG wouldn't respond to this post.

During Reagan's presidency, the national debt grew from $997 billion in FY1981 to $2.85 trillion in FY1989 and the U.S. went from being the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor in under eight years.

The debt accumulation combined with the weakened economy produced a brief recession.

What is really crazy is Reagan himself described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency. Yet 1bad doesn't mention this when he talks about those tax cuts.

I wonder why????

Super fan gonna super fan

[1bad65]

IYet 1bad doesn't mention this when he talks about those tax cuts.

I wonder why????

I've addressed it many times.

Try and keep up.

The reason for the increased deficits was because despite revenue increasing, spending increased at an even faster rate .

It's simple Math.

Here, I'll try a simple example:

You're running a deficit in your household budget.

Your boss gives you a $5k/yr raise.
You then go out and increase your spending by $7k/yr.

Thus your budget deficit went up.

What is to blame for your higher deficits:
A. Your income
B. Your spending

A or B, guys......

[1bad65]

Super fan gonna super fan

Yes, Dunn does that well.

One of the site's best.

(And it's one word; superfan. Remember, mimic properly when you must mimic another man.)

[1bad65]

Only if you spend more.

If spending stays the same, an increase in tax revenues will necessarily lead to a lower deficit.

Similarly, with spending held constant, a decrease in tax revenues will necessarily lead to a higher deficit.

True.

But in this case spending went up. It always does, sadly.

So you blame spending for the deficits, correct?

[siablo14]

Oh Lord.

Just when you think they can't get any more ignorant, they lower the bar.

Let me guess, despite illustrating his ignorance for all to see, that idiot somehow thought he was winning, right?

1bad can't even discuss it. If Tua had read all of what I posted, he wouldn't have posted that.

[siablo14]

Yes, Dunn does that well.

One of the site's best.

(And it's one word; superfan. Remember, mimic properly when you must mimic another man.)

That was aimed at you.