Nothing To See Here. . .

[Kathianne]

It doesn't matter.


https://pjmedia.com/trending/cbo-projects-trillion-dollar-deficits-for-the-next-decade/


CBO Projects Trillion-Dollar Deficits for the Next Decade—And No One Seems to Care
BY RICK MORAN AUGUST 21, 2019

A trillion here. A trillion there. A trillion-dollar deficit as far as the eye can see.


But don't worry. You're not talking about real money. This is Trump money, where reality can be manipulated to reflect anything.


So Trump can simply claim the latest CBO report showing deficits beginning in 2020 to hit more than a trillion dollars through 2029, to be fake news. Or a Democratic lie.


It's certainly more appetizing to ignore reality than to accept it.


CNBC:


The U.S. budget deficit is expected to hit $960 billion in 2019, and average a whopping $1.2 trillion per year between 2020 and 2029, according to the CBO’s look ahead at the U.S. budget and economic outlook over the next decade.


The new deficit projection for 2019 rose $63 billion from the last report, which came out in May. The CBO says this is mainly because of the massive new budget deal, which passed both houses of Congress and was signed into law by Trump in early August.


“The nation’s fiscal outlook is challenging,” CBO Director Phillip Swagel said in the report. “Federal debt, which is already high by historical standards, is on an unsustainable course.”


Now, don't worry your pretty little heads about this. After all, Medicare has been saying that spending on the program is "unsustainable" for years and the sky hasn't fallen. Saying spending is "unsustainable" is government-speak for "at least until we can raise your taxes."


Also, this is wartime and we should expect these deficits. What war, you ask? The trade war, of course, silly.

...

[STTAB]

It doesn't matter.


https://pjmedia.com/trending/cbo-projects-trillion-dollar-deficits-for-the-next-decade/


No one in Washington actually cares. Not Trump, not the GOP, not the Dems, not even the supposed Freedom Caucus.

There are so many practical real solutions that don't hurt people that could be used to cut this deficit, but no one cares.

The amount of money these people dole out has gotten so large that it seems like monopoly money to them. Baltimore can't explain where $15B over a two year span went? Oh well. $300M for a fighter jet that is being phased out before the first order of 100 is even delivered, yes please. a $10M study on homosexual Chinese Shrimp? We'll take two, etc etc.

Unless and until we figure out a way to take buying votes out of the equation nothing will change.

[Gunny]

So is Trump money less real that AOC money? Just wondering.

[STTAB]

So is Trump money less real that AOC money? Just wondering.


Orange man bad, so his deficits are worse than others.

You stupid smelly deplorable Wal Mart shopper

[Gunny]

Orange man bad, so his deficits are worse than others.

You stupid smelly deplorable Wal Mart shopperI resent THAT. I do NOT shop at Wal Mart :slap:

(I support local as much as possible) :)

At least Trump knows what money is. One of the first things I heard from AOC was when asked where she planned to get the money for her Green New Deal her response was "It's there".

[STTAB]

I resent THAT. I do NOT shop at Wal Mart :slap:

(I support local as much as possible) :)

At least Trump knows what money is. One of the first things I heard from AOC was when asked where she planned to get the money for her Green New Deal her response was "It's there".
I shop at Wal Mart, just bought a new laptop there last night. Part of living in the boonies, some things if you want them when you want them, it's Wal Mart. Honestly , I can't even think of a local store that sells computers around here. We do have a local appliance store, and he's a nice enough guy, but I'm not spending 50% more on an appliance when I can drive 30 minutes to Home Depot and get the same thing.

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Obama DOUBLED the national debt... where was the concern then?

[Kathianne]

Obama DOUBLED the national debt... where was the concern then?
Look it up, EVERYONE here was writing about it, some probably used lots of caps and colors to emphasize their points.

Now though, it's all jolly good! No worries! Moving along.

[Kathianne]

Nothing, it's nothing:

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2019/08/22/america-nearing-trillion-dollar-deficit-year-run-trillion-dollar-deficit-next-year/


We Did It! America Nearing Trillion-Dollar Deficit This Year, Should Run Trillion-Dollar Deficit Next Year Too
ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 6:01 pm on August 22, 2019

They say America can’t achieve big things anymore, particularly big things that require bipartisan cooperation.


But I’d call this “big.” And it really is an achievement: Imagine how terrible at basic responsible governance both of our national parties needed to be to produce trillion-dollar deficits at a moment of gangbusters economic growth.

Any schmuck can run a deficit when the economy’s shrinking. But when it’s growing steadily and adding six figures in new jobs month after month?


That’s a bona fide accomplishment. The degree of difficulty is off the charts.


The federal budget deficit is growing faster than expected as President Trump’s spending and tax cut policies force the United States to borrow increasing sums of money.




The deficit — the gap between what the government takes in through taxes and other sources of revenue and what it spends — will reach $960 billion for the 2019 fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. That gap will widen to $1 trillion for the 2020 fiscal year, the Congressional Budget Office said in updated forecasts released on Wednesday.




That damage would be even higher if not for lower-than-expected interest rates, which are reducing the amount of money the government has to pay to its lenders. Still, the 2019 deficit is projected to be 25 percent larger than it was in 2018, and the budget office predicts it will continue to rise every year through 2023.


The current record for consecutive years with a deficit increase is five, notes the Times — and that during World War II, when the country was marshaling every available resource towards war.

Choose your culprit here — or rather, don’t choose since they’re not mutually exclusive. It starts with Trump, who’s showed zero interest in spending cuts at the same time that he’s pursued massive revenue reduction in the form of tax cuts. Twitter pal Jeff Dobbs reminded me yesterday of this exchange, immortalized by the Daily Beast in an article from December:


Since the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s aides and advisers have tried to convince him of the importance of tackling the national debt…




The friction came to a head in early 2017 when senior officials offered Trump charts and graphics laying out the numbers and showing a “hockey stick” spike in the national debt in the not-too-distant future. In response, Trump noted that the data suggested the debt would reach a critical mass only after his possible second term in office.




“Yeah, but I won’t be here,” the president bluntly said, according to a source who was in the room when Trump made this comment during discussions on the debt.


Trump was chattering about new tax cuts as recently as two days ago, consumed with economic stimulus to improve his electoral chances despite what that would mean for future deficits, particularly entitlements. And that’s on top of the tax revenue lost to the slower pace of economic growth due to his trade war. But it can’t all be laid off on Trump: The many Republican frauds in Congress who pounded the table for smaller government when Obama was in charge are also complicit, of course, starting with Trump’s own chief of staff. If the essential fraudulence of the tea-party era had to be reduced to a single quote, it would be this one from former fiscal superhawk Mick Mulvaney:



https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1159501967271575553/kt4OE1WL_bigger.jpg (https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri)Tara Palmeri

(https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri)
Trump told supporters 40-50% of speech will be about foreign policy. When asked if the deficit will be mentioned in #SOTU (https://twitter.com/hashtag/SOTU?src=hash) speech, chief of staff Mulvaney said “nobody cares,” per attendee https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri/status/1092864368658841602 … (https://t.co/YeBTSdF3HX)
Tara Palmeri


NEW: President Trump spoke to 20 Republican supporters yesterday at the WH about what to expect in #SOTU speech. Here are the very broad talking points they handed out, “choosing greatness” in bold.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DyqiWRqV4AAHfj0?format=jpg&name=medium



The post-Trump era for the Republican Party will be a parade of people whimpering that they privately disagreed with a lot of the things he did and said, but none of that pandering will be as disgusting as the Mulvaneys on the Hill suddenly rediscovering that they’re against deficits once Democrats are back in charge. As it is, the best the Times can do to find Republicans in a position of influence willing to criticize Trump’s spending is John Thune sheepishly saying, “I hope in a second term, he is interested” in entitlement reform, as if he and McConnell couldn’t roadblock any legislation they wanted to right now in order to focus Trump on spending.


And then there are the Democrats, for whom any cut to discretionary spending apart from defense spending is a new Holocaust, stealing bread from the mouths of children by reverting to the archaic spending levels the federal government maintained just one or two years ago. Even defense cuts are uncomfortable for them since it leaves them open to the Republican charge that they’re weak on national security. This year’s presidential primary has been a sustained exercise in who can promise more by way of new spending, with Bernie Sanders rolling out a $16 trillion environmental plan literally yesterday. Invariably lip service is paid to how these programs will “pay for themselves” but no one, progressives included, believes that; the federal track record of blowing through budgets is too long for even semi-plausible deniability. “It’ll pay for itself” is just a way of dismissing the inevitable rejoinder that massive new entitlements like Medicare for All and total student-loan forgiveness aren’t within our means. The “best” argument for preferring Democrats to the modern GOP on deficits is that they at least understand that tax revenue is a component of deficit reduction. The worst is that they’d have to soak the middle class 10 times over to make their agenda deficit-neutral.


Exit question: With both parties trending left on spending, what’s the way out of this? Is there one apart from a massive fiscal crisis that forces a bipartisan reckoning?

[icansayit]

Truth is....and everyone here should be intelligent enough to recognize it. But....CONGRESS is to blame for the Increases in spending, and the mounting Debt. They are the OTHER branch of the Government who decides WHAT MONEY will be spent Where.

Sure...the President COULD Veto everything against his better wishes. But what would that get for WE THE PEOPLE in return?

"A MORE STAGNANT WASHINGTON SWAMP WHERE NOTHING BUT NOTHING GETS DONE!!!

Blame Trump for everything. Just the way the Dems blamed Bush, and now Trump. Somebody PLEASE......Think!

[Kathianne]

Truth is....and everyone here should be intelligent enough to recognize it. But....CONGRESS is to blame for the Increases in spending, and the mounting Debt. They are the OTHER branch of the Government who decides WHAT MONEY will be spent Where.

Sure...the President COULD Veto everything against his better wishes. But what would that get for WE THE PEOPLE in return?

"A MORE STAGNANT WASHINGTON SWAMP WHERE NOTHING BUT NOTHING GETS DONE!!!

Blame Trump for everything. Just the way the Dems blamed Bush, and now Trump. Somebody PLEASE......Think!


Congress, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, has done nothing. There has been little to nothing for the President to veto.

Almost everything done, just like the previous administration has been by executive order.

That is why President Trump is being blamed, just as President Obama rightfully so was blamed before.

Some have problems blaming this current president that were all in on blaming the previous.

[icansayit]

Congress, as has been pointed out ad nauseam, has done nothing. There has been little to nothing for the President to veto.

Almost everything done, just like the previous administration has been by executive order.

That is why President Trump is being blamed, just as President Obama rightfully so was blamed before.

Some have problems blaming this current president that were all in on blaming the previous.


I already know, you dislike Trump. Nothing more to say.

[LongTermGuy]

It doesn't matter.


https://pjmedia.com/trending/cbo-projects-trillion-dollar-deficits-for-the-next-decade/


ahhhh...yes:rolleyes:...Never Trumpers never stop.. always hoping...searching and wishing...when money is spent on "good needed things" and to clean up messes left by never Trumpers and their liberal friends I have no problem with dat...
:coffee:

https://imgoat.com/uploads/c4b761a28b/156554.gif

[Kathianne]

I already know, you dislike Trump. Nothing more to say.


And I already know that you refuse to give any thought to what has been going on. Don't care so much about those grandchildren after all?

BTW, you must be blind to all the positive things that I have acknowledged Trump has done and the unfair way he's been treated by your 'Deep State' et al.

[LongTermGuy]

I already know, you dislike Trump. Nothing more to say.

Agree friend..we all know...some dont want to say it out loud...careful now..we dont want to get her all upset....:laugh:


https://www.recreoviral.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Razones-por-las-que-los-pelirrojos-son-incre%C3%ADbles.gif

[High_Plains_Drifter]

Look it up, EVERYONE here was writing about it, some probably used lots of caps and colors to emphasize their points.

Now though, it's all jolly good! No worries! Moving along.
I certainly didn't mean you, personally, Kath. I was making a generic statement.

I don't think anyone in Washington is concerned with the debt. Not since Pero, whom I voted for. I think they know it's too big to even pay off now, so they have some nefarious plan already in the works to just WIPE IT CLEAN somehow when the interest on the debt becomes too much to pay.

[icansayit]

And I already know that you refuse to give any thought to what has been going on. Don't care so much about those grandchildren after all?

BTW, you must be blind to all the positive things that I have acknowledged Trump has done and the unfair way he's been treated by your 'Deep State' et al.


Don't care about what you think, or believe about me. But the LOW BLOW about my grandchildren. You lose. I would never consider such liberal patronization using your grandchildren.

DONE. Over.

[Kathianne]

Don't care about what you think, or believe about me. But the LOW BLOW about my grandchildren. You lose. I would never consider such liberal patronization using your grandchildren.

DONE. Over.
Trillions and trillions of $$$ debt you are :clap::clap::clap::clap: be left to them. Yowzers. Funny how Republicans used to be concerned.

[STTAB]

Amazing that Trump has turned fiscal conservatives into fiscal liberals. If you bitched about how much Obama spent, but don't mind Trump's spending, you are delusional.

And of course the reverse is also true, if you didn't mind Obama's spending but all of a sudden you're concerned about Trump's , well that's stupid.

As for me. I understood the first time Trump signed a shitty spending bill because it had the money he wanted for the military. But the second time he did so, after saying "Ill never sign a bill like this again" was beyond the pale for me.

[Kathianne]

Amazing that Trump has turned fiscal conservatives into fiscal liberals. If you bitched about how much Obama spent, but don't mind Trump's spending, you are delusional.

And of course the reverse is also true, if you didn't mind Obama's spending but all of a sudden you're concerned about Trump's , well that's stupid.

As for me. I understood the first time Trump signed a shitty spending bill because it had the money he wanted for the military. But the second time he did so, after saying "Ill never sign a bill like this again" was beyond the pale for me.

Gee, I got it when he promised 'huge infrastructure-a trillion or more-that he knew the democrats could go along with.' Uh huh. He never, never promised, pretended to be a fiscal conservative.

Beyond the pale? You'll vote for him though, right? I would too if I'd thought he was the best last time.

[STTAB]

Gee, I got it when he promised 'huge infrastructure-a trillion or more-that he knew the democrats could go along with.' Uh huh. He never, never promised, pretended to be a fiscal conservative.

Beyond the pale? You'll vote for him though, right? I would too if I'd thought he was the best last time.

You just don't get me RE: Trump at all Kathy. I can go both dislike things about him and still think he's the best option. I don't understand why that is such a hard concept for you to grasp. I've never been a rah rah MAGA guy. I didn't even vote for him in 2006 because of his tweets. ENTIRELY. I made the calculated choice that Arkansas would go Trump with or without my vote and so I protested that he and Hillary were the best we could offer by voting third party. I may even do that again. I can't stand some of the things Trump does on a personal level, and while I agree with much of his policies there are other policies that I don't agree with, and he certainly is dishonest when it suits him. On the other hand, he has been attacked relentlessly by nearly everyone since before taking office, and I will call that out too and I will defend him against baseless attacks.

Maybe I'm just too multi faceted in my analysis of the man than you are. Hell back in the Obama days I often got criticized by people here for being the same towards Obama, I hated many of the things he did, but I wouldn't join in the "he's a Kenyan Muslim bastard" bullshit, I defended him against that kind of nonsense , doesn't mean I supported Obama . Just like saying Trump should not have done _________ doesn't mean I don't support him.

In the overall , I support Trump. but I reserve the right to criticize him as I see fit.

Long story short, sorry my criticisms of Trump don't meet your standards.