Nomadsfest Sox Fans

A forum for the old AOL board Sox fans and others.


    49 billion surplus in Jan

    Share
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:45 pm

    The 361 billion collected in tax revenue is suppose to be some kind of record.  It was well ahead of any projection.  What good is the CBO when they are constantly wrong

    Maybe they should be the CBS since BS is a good description for their track record
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:19 pm

    This story doesn't paint quite the rosy picture that you do.  The 361 billion is 5% higher than last January.  But they spent 6% more than they spent last January.  Hypothetically, shouldn't every month be higher than the last month and higher than any month ever in history, assuming we're in a growing economy and our population is increasing?  

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-stocks/wall-st-advances-investors-lock-on-inflation-data-idUSKBN1FX1HR
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:27 pm

    HYpothetically, you are never ever intellectually honest about anything political.  The fact that you think Obama shrunk the deficit is more proof of your lying nature

    BTW, here are the numbers

    DATE, Debt, Delta

    9/30/201719,844,873,705,820.40    271,428,991,883.70
    9/30/201619,573,444,713,936.70  1,422,827,047,452.40
    9/30/2015  18,150,617,666,484.30     326,546,285,750.50
    9/30/2014  17,824,071,380,733.80   1,085,887,854,036.80
    9/30/2013  16,738,183,526,697.00     671,942,119,311.20
    9/30/2012  16,066,241,407,385.80   1,275,901,078,828.70
    9/30/2011  14,790,340,328,557.10   1,228,717,297,665.40
    9/30/2010  13,561,623,030,891.70   1,651,794,027,380.00
    9/30/2009  11,909,829,003,511.70   1,885,104,106,599.30
    9/30/2008  10,024,724,896,912.40   1,017,071,524,649.92
    9/30/2007    9,007,653,372,262.48     500,679,473,047.25
    9/30/2006    8,506,973,899,215.23     574,264,237,491.73
    9/30/2005    7,932,709,661,723.50     553,656,965,393.18
    9/30/2004    7,379,052,696,330.32     595,821,633,586.70
    9/30/2003    6,783,231,062,743.62     554,995,097,146.46
    9/30/2002    6,228,235,965,597.16     420,772,553,397.10
    What I find very curious is that Bush worst year is the year Obama took over and Obama's best year is the year Trump took over.

    Regardless, anybody who can look at the numbers and think Obama reduced the deficit probably thinks multicolinearity wins baseball games.  Hey wait, don't you believe that

    LMAO!!!!
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:35 pm

    You are conveniently again using on-book and off-book government accounting maneuvers to pretend Obama grew the deficit.  Fine.  Do that.  It's easy to look at the annual revenues and gov't spending and see the deficits shrinking year over year for Obama.  They do some off-book accounting whereby they borrow money from one pocket and put it into another pocket i.e. borrowing from the SS trust fund to pay debt, rather than issue bonds at interest to pay it.  This stuff is all easy to look up and the financials are easily trackable on WhiteHouse.gov.

    If you think that somehow we went from having a $326 billion deficit in 2015 to a $1.4 trillion in 2016 to a $271 billion in 2017, then you are a far dumber motherfucker than I ever imagined.  Holy shit.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 9:54 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:You are conveniently again using on-book and off-book government accounting maneuvers to pretend Obama grew the deficit.  Fine.  Do that.

    OUTRIGHT LIE!!!!

    I am using simple subtraction to calculate the change in the national debt, which many people believe is the correct way to calculate a deficit


      It's easy to look at the annual revenues and gov't spending and see the deficits shrinking year over year for Obama.  They do some off-book accounting whereby they borrow money from one pocket and put it into another pocket i.e. borrowing from the SS trust fund to pay debt, rather than issue bonds at interest to pay it.  This stuff is all easy to look up and the financials are easily trackable on WhiteHouse.gov.

    And my data is from the US Treasury and just as easy to look up


    If you think that somehow we went from having a $326 billion deficit in 2015 to a $1.4 trillion in 2016 to a $271 billion in 2017, then you are a far dumber motherfucker than I ever imagined.  Holy shit.



    Wrong again.  My way is actual money out the door.  Your way, by your own admission is accounting trickery.  What else do you call on the books off the books.


    So you are the real dumb mother fucker if you think robbing the SSN trust makes it OK


    And to show how even dumber you are, you're citing budgetary projections instead of actual cash in and out.  So now you got on ooks, off books, on budget off budget blah blah blah.  The KARK, just a simple, easy to understand delta without any bullshit.  Maybe that is why many economists think the debt delta is the better way to calculating a deficit


    PS, the actual change in the national debt is 327, 1423, 271.  the Math is the Math.  And those are the answers.  The year b4 it was 1085.  Maybe Obama was hoarding cash for election years.  
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:04 pm

    Like I said...one dumb muthafucka.
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:11 pm

    What you are overlooking is how SS trustfund (and some other funds) and fed treasury borrow back and forth from one another depending on interest rates, surplus funds, and whether its advantageous to do so or not. A CPA that aint dumb as a stump oughtta be able to grasp that shit. That Mauldin column I linked in a couple days ago makes a specific but vague reference to this.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:12 pm

    ROBZ CAN'T READ HIS OWN NUMBERS!!!!


    Deficits in billions
    20072008200920102011201220132014201520162017 
    $161$458$1,413$1,294$1,295$1,087$679$485$438$585$665
    TOOK OBAMA HIS WHOLE FIRST TERM TO GET UNDER A TRILLION!!!!


    ONLY ONCE DID HE FALL BELOW PRE 2009 LEVELS, JUST BARELY!!!!!


    ROBZ WANTS TO LIE THAT 2009 IS THE BENCH MARK


    PURE BULLSHIT.


    AVERAGE DEFICIT UNDER BUSH WAS ALMOST HALF THE AVERAGE DEFICIT UNDER OBAMA


    OBAMA SUCKED ON THE ECONOMY, NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:14 pm

    So then how will you feel when its consistently above a trillion during boom times?
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:14 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:What you are overlooking is how SS trustfund (and some other funds) and fed treasury borrow back and forth from one another depending on interest rates, surplus funds, and whether its advantageous to do so or not.  A CPA that aint dumb as a stump oughtta be able to grasp that shit.  That Mauldin column I linked in a couple days ago makes a specific but vague reference to this.


    AND YOU ARE OVERLOOKING ABOUT 11 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!


    SO GROW UP AND ADMIT YOU WHOLE ARGUMENT IS BASED UPON A FALSE PREMISE
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:16 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:So then how will you feel when its consistently above a trillion during boom times?


    I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:18 pm

    Overlooking nothing. Increased from 11.9 to 19.7 under Obama. That sucks, but considering the first four yrs, I'm encouraged. Starve the Beast is working well.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:19 pm

    PS, HILLARY'S RAPIST HUSBAND DOESN'T HAVE HIS PAPER SURPLUSSES WITHOUT NEWT DRAGGING HIM, KICKING AND SCREAMING ALL THE WAY


    SO JUST ADMIT TO YOUR LIE.  YOU AIN'T FOOLING ANYBODY
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:20 pm

    You wont let me know when it happens. You will conveniently pretend it isnt happening, or blame Obama. Or Hillary.
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:23 pm

    Yes, after Newt and Reagan and Bush blew the doors off the debt with tax cuts and loose spending, they forced Clinton to cut spending. We agree.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:23 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:Overlooking nothing.  Increased from 11.9 to 19.7 under Obama.  That sucks, but considering the first four yrs, I'm encouraged.  Starve the Beast is working well.


    LIVE EXISTED PRIOR TO 2009

    IN FACT FROM 2005 TO 2007, BUSH PRACTICALLY CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF.  318 TO 160

    TOO BAD THE FUCKING BANKERS SCREWED EVERYTHING UP WITH MORTGAGE BACKED SECURITIES ND THE HOUSING BUBBLE

    AND HOW MANY OF THESE CROOKS DID YOUR HERO SEND TO JAIL????

    ABOUT TIME YOU REALIZE YOUR HERO WAS ON THE TAKE JUST LIKE THAT CROOKED CUNT YOU THOUGHT SHOULD BE PRESIDENT BECAUSE OF HER VAGINA
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:34 pm

    Kinda changing the subject all of a sudden. Definitely always be blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a move that never fails. Would have been nice to see some bankers jailed, but you have to prove they committed a crime. Did they commit a crime? I dont really know. Definitely some shady ethics, however.
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:38 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:Yes, after Newt and Reagan and Bush blew the doors off the debt with tax cuts and loose spending, they forced Clinton to cut spending. We agree.


    LMAO!!!!!!!


    Nobody oversimplifies and distorts the facts like you do

    tax cuts.....

    Do you just make this shit up as you go along?!?!?!?!?!

    The loose spending are the damn entitlement programs that go on and on and on forever.  As well as constantly increasing in scope and size.  Not to mention all the fraud and waste.  That is what Clinton was forced to cut.  And it worked so well he starting taking credit for it.  Jackass Obama undid welfare reform

    What was Reagan's entitlement program that haunts us?!?!?!  Besides the Amnesty he was conned into by Democrats.  

    Trump killing Obamacare will by for the infrastructure Obama was suppose to build with his stimulus but instead, used it for politcal payoffs.  Some Hero
    avatar
    Deplorable Mark
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 2628
    Join date : 2016-09-16

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Deplorable Mark on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:40 pm

    Soxillinirob wrote:Kinda changing the subject all of a sudden. Definitely always be blaming Obama and Hillary.  It's a move that never fails.  Would have been nice to see some bankers jailed, but you have to prove they committed a crime.  Did they commit a crime?  I dont really know.  Definitely some shady ethics, however.


    your the progressive

    its you people that claim it all intersects

    so enjoy the taste of your own medicine, the KARK needs his beauty rest
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:47 pm

    Which entitlement spending? Social security? Medicare? We pay for those. Look up how much we spend on food stamps and welfare, etc. It's a pittance compared to the military. We keep giving away the money to pay for things via tax cuts. Starve the Beast is working.
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:43 am

    Deplorable Mark wrote:

    I am using simple subtraction to calculate the change in the national debt, which many people believe is the correct way to calculate a deficit

    How about use the actual way that everyone calculates the deficit, which is to take all revenue and subtract all expenses and come up with a number?  The fact that after that number is computed, they shift some funds around to take advantage of some accounting tricks or some low interest bonds shouldn't really have a real effect.  They inflate the nat'l debt figure when they do that, and then they neglect to say that they also have an excess of funds in the SS trust fund of about 2.5 to 3 trillion bucks.  Thusly, a large chunk of that nat'l debt figure ends up being money that the nat'l gov't owes itself.  The left pocket owes the right pocket.  It's dumb that they account for it in such a manner, but the SS Trust fund is an Account Receivable of 2-3 trillion, which can be netted against the nat'l debt for an overall US Nat'l debt figure.  It's why we occasionally hear financial experts refer to our national debt as being 15 or 16 trillion, rather than 20.  Problem is that I don't know where to find the balance of the SSTF.
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Wed Feb 14, 2018 7:55 am

    Deplorable Mark wrote:

    LIVE EXISTED PRIOR TO 2009

    IN FACT FROM 2005 TO 2007, BUSH PRACTICALLY CUT THE DEFICIT IN HALF.  318 TO 160

    I like to look at deficits in a macroeconomic sense, rather than just a single, one or two year delta.  Our economy was doing great from 2005 to 2007.  I was in commercial banking and things were slamming.  Everything being built was being sold in 5 mins.  The deficit should have been a surplus.  We need a macroeconomic tax policy that will run negative during slow times and positive during boom times, and then be neutral during lean times.  We keep cutting taxes, which is great for getting a quick economic bump, but horrible for keeping the deficit under control.  


    Nobody out there is arguing that tax cuts don't help the economy.  The most liberal of the liberals will agree that a tax cut for the middle class will bring some growth, but those cuts ought to be saved for when a cut is needed and then raised when revenues are needed.  It worked for Clinton.  Bush tax cuts were nice for the economy for a few years and then once the obligatory bubble formed and recession hit, we had no revenues coming in.  Now that rates are even lower, just wait until the shit hits the fan next time.  These tax cuts were done to repay the rich dick billionaires that have been paying for the GOP campaigns for 10 yrs.  They demanded it, and threatened to cut their $$ off if they didn't get a tax cut.  


    The economy was doing well.  It was growing.  Unemployment was essentially 0% when you consider that 4.5% is generally considered full employment.  This tax cut was the equivalent of throwing gasoline on a healthy fire.  There will be consequences that are uncomfortable.  We don't even know what the consequences will fully be, but I just heard that the latest financial report says inflation just took a huge jump last month.  That'll probably have a very uncomfortable affect on the stock market today.
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:50 am

    Good article that just came out, apparently, about 10 mins ago.  Perfectly encapsulates what I've been explaining here and what we're likely to see over the next 5 yrs.  Not a flaming liberal column.  Written by a numbers and stats geek.  

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-economy-is-soaring-and-now-so-is-the-deficit-thats-a-bad-combination/

    al in cal
    Al Smith's Beer Bath

    Posts : 158
    Join date : 2009-04-11
    Age : 72
    Location : California

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by al in cal on Mon Mar 26, 2018 11:34 pm

    Deplorable Mark wrote:The 361 billion collected in tax revenue is suppose to be some kind of record.  It was well ahead of any projection.  What good is the CBO when they are constantly wrong

    Maybe they should be the CBS since BS is a good description for their track record

    Just catching up on these threads. You are right, Kark. Despite the piece of crap 2018 budget bill, more and more revenue is going to come in from Trump's economic wins. GNP is rising and this is only the beginning.

      I have long believed that the CBO should be eliminated and replaced by a more statistically sound system of projecting economic revenue and costs which the CBO has no relevance in. All these bozos can do is to project based on past history of both costs and revenues which is basically bullshit. Get rid of this concept and bring in some statistical and economic minds to reconstruct models of actual economic probability. Right?
    avatar
    Soxillinirob
    Chairman Reinsdorf

    Posts : 7802
    Join date : 2009-04-05
    Age : 52
    Location : St. Charles, IL

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Soxillinirob on Tue Mar 27, 2018 8:08 am

    When do the big financial and revenue gains hit the treasury. Looks like they have signicantly downward revised expectations in 2018. Polls find that most Americans arent noticing this newfound tax cut in their check. This was supposed to bring 3.5 to 5% growth. Now they are expecting 2-3%.

    Sponsored content

    Re: 49 billion surplus in Jan

    Post by Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Apr 25, 2018 1:22 pm