Current Topics
The Republican Platform
by pdx rick
26 minutes 27 seconds ago
RoundTable for Summer 2020
by pdx rick
41 minutes 24 seconds ago
Portland. A Turning Point?
by pdx rick
Today at 12:55 PM
Half of troops have an unfavorable opinion of President Bone Spurs
by CPWILL
Today at 07:42 AM
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Has Died
by CPWILL
Today at 07:30 AM
Global warming predictions
by Greger
Yesterday at 10:02 PM
West Coast Burning
by NW Ponderer
Yesterday at 06:57 PM
Bob Woodward's book details Trump's chaotic and dysfunctional White House
by Greger
Yesterday at 06:57 PM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by Greger
Yesterday at 06:21 PM
Coronavirus: The Plague of The 21st Century?
by pondering_it_all
09/18/20 05:18 AM
The Boogaloo Bois
by pondering_it_all
09/17/20 08:17 AM
How the world sees U.S. and Trump
by jgw
09/16/20 09:01 PM
The Trump campaign is broke
by pdx rick
09/15/20 12:20 PM
Barr is acting as ‘personal henchman’ of Trump
by Greger
09/13/20 09:33 PM
Covid Long Haulers
by jgw
09/07/20 06:23 PM
A post, on facebook, by my granddaughter that covers it all pretty good!
by pondering_it_all
09/02/20 07:27 PM
The Democratic Fight
by jgw
09/02/20 06:09 PM
voters who don't
by pondering_it_all
09/01/20 08:35 AM
There needs to be a ‘real reckoning’ for Trump’s abuses if Biden wins
by pdx rick
08/31/20 12:43 AM
WV woman goes to Mexico with her daughter and series of TOP SECRET U.S docs
by pondering_it_all
08/30/20 08:06 PM
Forum Stats
6292 Members
60 Forums
16994 Topics
302811 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 4 of 13 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12 13 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#320169 - 01/19/20 06:15 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: pdx rick]
jgw Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 3599
Loc: Port Angeles, WA
The Republican party is no longer the Party of the Conservatives (but not all!) The Impeachment 'Trial' may actually point this one out if the Dems can get the goods (wishful thinking - something I am REALLY good at!).
The truth is that revenues are up. Revenues have been bolstered, by a LOT, by tariffs, attacks on Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare. Its interesting. We are now experiencing the longest economic growth in history. Some of it may well be supported by changes in regulations, anyway, its a fact.

Its also a fact that most other economies are not doing all that well and seem to be getting worse and worse. There are also signs that we may also experiencing a bubble. The simple fact is that what goes up also goes down. That is a truism that is absolutely correct. We now have, we are told, the lowest unemployment figures in the history of the nation. That may be right or wrong but the figures are GOOD!

All that being said there is another truism here and that is that "voters vote their wallets". That too is right on, they do! Now for another fact. The Democrats have NEVER beaten the Republicans when there is a really good economy and we have one right now. I know, I understand about living wages, 3 jobs, etc. The problem, from a Democratic standpoint is that they still vote their wallets AND the simple fact that they can actually get 3 jobs! Wallets are all the same, thin or thick - that too is a simple fact.

Several months ago I wrote something about the Dems using the term "Socialist" and got ripped for it. Now its coming home to roost and The Dems own it and its going to seriously cost them. I don't think there is any doubt about that. There have been a lot of talk about "Democratic" Socialism and how its different and the big result of all that is - ZIP! Socialism has been a cause for a very long time. I am not sure but I suspect that its failed everytime its been actually tried. Hitler, for instance, was a "National Socialist Workers Party" (didn't work well). Words have power.

Oh, the latest figures also note that those who are college educated support Dems and them that are not support Trump. This is not unusual for a populist who can play with truth/lies well and is a historic fact. Its just the way it is. When you got a problem with a populist you have to face it right on. The Dems, to may way of thinking, haven't really done that and they will pay that price too. They can still win if they can get out the vote, especially the vote of the independents, and they are so busy talking to each other that they seem to be forgetting that little truth.

I should also mention that I tried getting rich on Predictit (gambling on politics) and lost my shirt so all of my blather ...........

Top
#320178 - 01/19/20 09:09 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: logtroll]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: CPWILL
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Are you saying that the tax reduction was not lost revenue?

(shrug) the Pro-Growth impacts of a predictable regulatory regime and reduced tax burdens are real. Revenues have gone up.

The simple fact that revenues would have been higher without the tax cuts is real.


Respectfully, that is not a fact. That is an assessment which depends upon assumptions, some of which may - or may not - be valid. An example of a fact would be the fact that Revenues went up, even as the Deficit did.
This demonstrates that the Deficit is far and away primarily driven by spending, and, I would point out, that increase in spending relative to GDP (and, thus – see below – our revenues) is driven primarily by the Entitlements:

[img]https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/16fivethirtyeight-gov7-blog4801.jpg?w=575[/img]

So, again, to my original point – we don’t have a revenue problem in this country. We have a spending problem.


Originally Posted By: logtroll
Do you think that it would have had an impact on the deficit if the tax cuts had not been enacted?

This gets complicated quickly.

1. I think that the primary driver of Revenues is not tax rates, but, rather, growth. If you chart revenues relative to tax rates, you see that rates can change wildly without producing a comparable change in revenues. If you chart it compared with growth, however, you see more consistency. Hauser's Law is a pithy depiction of this:

[img:left]https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2F4.bp.blogspot.com%2F-_VUStpyvgg8%2FXD3gBqYj8DI%2FAAAAAAAAR2Y%2Fmbp5vvD61l0Xr1-3UxRKnPeH_q86SsBtwCLcBGAs%2Fs1600%2Fhausers-law-in-action-1946-2018.png&f=1&nofb=1[/img]


Now, if you pay close attention to that chart, you will note that the average for the second half is slightly higher than the average for the first:

[img:left]https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fflamingdumbass.files.wordpress.com%2F2010%2F12%2Fincome-tax-revenue1.png&f=1&nofb=1[/img]



That is because, when we reduced top marginal rates from maximum punishment (you could say, when we shifted from the right side of the Laffer Curve to the left side), we incentivized production relative to tax-avoidance strategies. We not only collected more revenue due to higher growth, we actually collected more revenue as a portion of GDP, meaning that more of that growth was being captured by federal revenues than in previous decades.


TL/DR: Incentives Work. Higher Tax Rates MUCH Less So.


Edited by CPWILL (01/19/20 09:28 PM)
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320179 - 01/19/20 09:14 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
Alright, anyone know how to make the images work? I'm screwing this all up :p
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320181 - 01/19/20 09:22 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
anywho...

Originally Posted By: logtroll
Do you think that it would have had an impact on the deficit if the tax cuts had not been enacted?

…ctd:
2. This suggests that the impact of – most - changes to marginal tax rates on revenues is primarily a result not of direct taxing behavior, but, rather, an indirect result stemming from those changes’ impact on Growth. This means that the structure of changes in tax rates matters very much, since what you are trying to incentivize is production. A temporary tax rebate that lowers effective tax rates for a single year doesn’t change incentives, and doesn’t change long term behavior. George W. tried this to little-or-no effect in 2001 and again in 2008. Long-term rate changes, in contrast, do change incentive structures, and therefore can change long-term behaviors.

Different levels and kinds of taxes also demonstrate different levels of elasticity (responsiveness to changes). Changes in payroll taxes, for example, produce relatively less changes to the incentive to work (because they impact especially those who have little choice), whereas changes in capital gains or top marginal income rates produce relatively greater changes to incentives (because those activities are more easily shifted in response).

What this means for scoring tax rate changes is that tax policy can’t be scored in a vacuum if it is to be scored accurately (and this is the part that sucks because it makes actually scoring the dang thing an absolute nightmare of complicated and even complex interactions). Tax Rates have to share their impact with Regulatory Policy and exogenous factors.

An extreme example which shows the rule: The Kardashian Administration of 2036 decided to cut all taxes to a 20% flat rate of monies earned over 200% FPL (hooray!), got Congress to re-take regulatory law issuance (hooray!) and started automatically sunsetting aging regulatory structures unless Congress was willing to re-issue them under its own authority (hooray!). Growth is gonna do great!.

Unfortunately, Clone-Putin who had replaced Previous Putin 1.0 in Russia turned out to have some unrecognized brain damage, and he nuked the eastern seaboard. Net Impact of Government Actions on Revenues: +5, Net Impact of Exogenous Factors: -5,000,000.

A more relevant recent example of Exogenous impacts could include the development of the American Shale-Oil industry (major boon) in response to rising gas prices back in 2009-2010 (major not-so-boon). Tax Policy didn’t drive growth in that sector of the economy and any resulting revenues except to the degree that it either discouraged it or failed to discourage it.

Reductions to long-range tax rates such as the ones that the Trump Administration put into law, therefore, are:

A) not going to be the primary driver of changes to revenues unless they are the primary driver of changes in growth rates, which can happen.
B) Positive, but can be mitigated by other federal policies (such as, for example, a poorly-thought-out trade war), while also being:
C) Boosted by other federal policies (such as, for example, a predictable regulatory regime, (which, if I may respectfully point out, plays a major role in growth that the left does not like to discuss, because doing so would force them to deal with the point that their preferred policy roles for the government can have unintended negative consequences)), and also while being:
D) Impacted by exogenous factors (such as, for example, international growth slowing, driving capital to the United States markets).


TL/DR: This crap is really complex, which is why even the math and policy geniuses at the CBO are so often off.


Edited by CPWILL (01/19/20 09:36 PM)
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320182 - 01/19/20 09:28 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Do you believe that growth resulting from more debt is a good thing? Is it even really growth?

I think our national debt is the single greatest national security and national governance risk that we face today. It is the largest, most obvious, slow-moving crises in history, and we as a nation seem determined to do nothing about it until it is too late, and all of our choices are horrific. See: Sig.
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320183 - 01/19/20 09:37 PM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: pdx rick]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
Sorry to spam the thread - but it was a good question, and I wanted to try to give it a good answer.
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320191 - 01/20/20 12:30 AM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 10331
Loc: One of the Mexicos
Originally Posted By: CPWILL
This crap is really complex, which is why even the math and policy geniuses at the CBO are so often off.

Occam's razor.

I think you are trying way too hard to make a bunch of complicated theories work to support a desired condition - low taxes and less regulation.

Here is one fact that is very annoying - why all the economic stimulus manipulations during a time of a booming economy? Tax cuts (strongly favoring them folks with money) and low interest rates being the most obvious? Why aren't they working to reduce the deficit? Isn't it natural to pay off debts when you are flush with cash?

It is a fact that the artificial stimuli did not add anything to the booming economy, but not taking revenue DID NOT do anything to boost revenues. I think jgw may have pegged that one - tariffs. Tariffs have brought in approximately as much revenue as the tax cuts threw away, but they have only harmed businesses (mine is one of them - thousands of dollars thrown away, for no benefit).

Then there is this little piece of evidence about high taxes and the economy - note the general correlation between high rates and prosperous times (and low national debt).



We have morphed into a debt-based economy - that is the problem. And you can't just blame spending. Some spending is a good investment with a long term positive ROI... some spending is really pointless and destructive. I don't see our spenders taking that into account, mostly because the spending is controlled by them that has most of the money, and they are shortsighted and greedy.
_________________________
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.”
– R. Buckminster Fuller

Top
#320193 - 01/20/20 12:53 AM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: logtroll]
CPWILL Offline
newbie

Registered: 12/26/19
Posts: 440
Originally Posted By: logtroll
Originally Posted By: CPWILL
This crap is really complex, which is why even the math and policy geniuses at the CBO are so often off.

Occam's razor.

I think you are trying way too hard to make a bunch of complicated theories work to support a desired condition - low taxes and less regulation.


Hm. Well, full-disclosure, my own preferred tax scheme (which I've worked on somewhat elsewhere) involves raising payroll taxes on high income earners (as part of reforming Social Security), but transforming income taxes into a rate of 25% of all income earned over 200% of the Federal Poverty Line for the Household (or individual) filing. In that manner, the effective rate would be perfectly progressive, as each additional dollar earned over that 200% of FPL would slightly increase the effective tax rate of the person paying. I paired this with a Negative Income Tax of 50% of all monies not earned below 200% of FPL, which I argued, should replace the current, damaging, transfer payments structure in this country.

However, to simply say "Pshaw! This stuff isn't complicated!" is.... well, it appeals to populists because populists like Clearly Defined Bad Guys and Promises Of Easy Answers.... but it's not a good policy answer, because - yeah - this stuff is complicated, and the problem is complex. A lot more goes into determining tax revenue than tax rates, and tax rates in our current environment don't even appear to be the main driver.

Quote:
Here is one fact that is very annoying - why all the economic stimulus manipulations during a time of a booming economy?


Because politicians only care about getting reelected, and the electorate is stupid enough to care only about the short term.

Quote:
Tax cuts (strongly favoring them folks with money) and low interest rates being the most obvious? Why aren't they working to reduce the deficit?


Because that would require that politicians make responsible decisions even if it costs them political support, and we out here in the voting public are swift to punish any politician foolish enough to do a thing like that.

Quote:
Isn't it natural to pay off debts when you are flush with cash?


It is the wise decision. I'm not sure it's the natural one.

Quote:
It is a fact that the artificial stimuli did not add anything to the booming economy, but not taking revenue DID NOT do anything to boost revenues. I think jgw may have pegged that one - tariffs. Tariffs have brought in approximately as much revenue as the tax cuts threw away, but they have only harmed businesses (mine is one of them - thousands of dollars thrown away, for no benefit).


As the wag once said: Trade wars are wars politicians wage against their own people.

Quote:
Then there is this little piece of evidence about high taxes and the economy - note the general correlation between high rates and prosperous times (and low national debt).



We are currently in the most prosperous time in the history of the Human Species... so....

Quote:
We have morphed into a debt-based economy - that is the problem.


I wholeheartedly agree with this, and, in fact, spend my free time teaching adults how to get out of consumer/college debt, and students how to never get into it in the first place.

Quote:
And you can't just blame spending.


As I said above, it's far and away the primary driver of the deficit. That doesn't make it the only factor at play, I agree - simply far and away the biggest, and the one that most needs solving.


Quote:
Some spending is a good investment with a long term positive ROI...


Wise infrastructure investments and an effective judicial system for enforcing law and contracts are the most common expressions of this.

Quote:
some spending is really pointless and destructive. I don't see our spenders taking that into account, mostly because the spending is controlled by them that has most of the money, and they are shortsighted and greedy.


...Eh, our public spending is controlled by our politicians, who can be influenced by others - including wealthy interests - but whose primary purpose is reelection. If every billionaire in this country told the Democratic Party they needed to get on board with privatizing Social Security, they would still be ignored, because the Democratic Party isn't about to commit deliberate political suicide.


Edited by CPWILL (01/20/20 12:56 AM)
_________________________
Winter Is Coming

Top
#320196 - 01/20/20 02:34 AM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
pdx rick Offline
Member
CHB-OG

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 43281
Loc: Puget Sound, WA
Originally Posted By: CPWILL
Originally Posted By: pdx rick
Originally Posted By: CPWILL
...The color of a president matters much less than his party.

TBagger depictions of Obama in African witch doctor garb tells us what's really the truth. smile

There is probably somewhere a conservative who finds nut-picking a convincing argument, but, I assure you, that conservative is not me.

Republicans were fired-up behind cutting the government when Carter was President and ran the Reagan Revolution to do so.... and then Reagan got in, and increased government spending instead, and Republicans loved him. Republicans were fired up behind cutting the government when Clinton was President, and had the Contract with America and everything... and then, W Bush became President, and increased spending, and Republicans generally liked him. Republicans were fired up behind cutting the government when Obama was President, and had the Tea Party and then...

As everyone knows, traditional Republicans and TBaggers aka modern Conservatives, are two different political animals. My comment was specific to TBaggers - the modern Conservative.

To conflate the two is being intellectually dishonest.

For the TBaggers, Obama's skin color was the quintessential objection to his presidency, along with Obama being an alleged Kenyan Marxist. And now with an old white racist Boomer in the WH again, TBaggers are comfortable with higher deficits and the direction this country is heading in.

Hmm
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#320197 - 01/20/20 02:35 AM Re: US budget deficit hits $984 billion, highest in 7 years [Re: CPWILL]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 10331
Loc: One of the Mexicos
What does prosperous mean to you?
_________________________
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.”
– R. Buckminster Fuller

Top
Page 4 of 13 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12 13 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 34 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Superfly, GreatNewsTonight, danarhea, RoughDraft274, CPWILL
6292 Registered Users
A2