In 2018 alone, revenues were around $200 billion less than what they would have otherwise been under previous tax policy. The tax bill directly contributed to an increase in the deficit of $200b in FY2018.
Assuming nothing else changes in the economy. Piss poor way to make your case.
No, assuming even more conservative growth. Thatās how baseline accounting works. Math is hard.
1 Like
This isnāt an accounting class.
In the real world the economy is very dynamic.
You are assuming conditions that cannot be shown would have existed.
Brah, we could have had negative gdp growth and still have pulled in more revenue under the previous tax policy. Because math.
Revenues are growing slower than anticipated. If YOY revenyes were up $1 it would be stupid to brag about it
1 Like
No it isnāt.
Yes, it empirically is.
No, it really isnāt.
From 2017 To 2018, what had a larger delta compared to 2017 baselines: revenues or expenditures?
you seem to miss the forest for the trees.
Every dollar matters.
what is your plan to pay down the debt? what are the numbers and sequence.
Here is a more fair assesssment regarding the deficit:
Federal Deficit-fed (USD billion nominal)
GDP-(USD billion nominal)
2014
$484.60
$17,522.00
2015
$438.49
$18,219.00
2016
$584.65
$18,707.00
2017
$665.37
$19,485.00
2018
$779.00
$20,501.00
The deficit bottomed in 2015 at 438 billion, and since then has resumed an uptrend as predicted by the CBO prior to that: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/49892.
Trump took office in 1/20/2017 and the tax cuts were not passed until November 2017 and hence the first legitimate year to analyze that would be 2018. So in effect 2016 and 2017 would represent that original economic trend that we had under Obama. So the more accurate number to use would be 665 billion. Now letās consider the three of the largest expenditures by the government in 2015 vs 2018:
2015: Social Security $882 billion; Medicare $540 billion; Medicaid cost $350 billion
2018: Social Security $1.102 trillion; Medicare $679 billion, Medicaid $418 billion.
The difference in just those three areas from 2015 to 2018 was an increase in 427 billion . So letās do some math: 665 billion + 427 billion = 1.1 trillion dollars (rounded). So my prediction had Hillary won the deficit would still be going up and likely be where it currently is today.
1 Like
Here are the numbers from 2014 to 2019:
| Fiscal Year | Revenue |
|---|---|
| FY 2021 | $3.86 (estimated) |
| FY 2020 | $3.71 trillion (estimated) |
| FY 2019 | $3.46 trillion (actual) |
| FY 2018 | $3.33 trillion |
| FY 2017 | $3.32 trillion |
| FY 2016 | $3.27 trillion |
| FY 2015 | $3.25 trillion |
| FY 2014 | $3.02 trillion |
2014-2015; 0.23 trillion
2015-2016; 0.02 trillion
2016-2017; 0.05 trillion
2017-2018; 0.01 trillion - first year of the tax cuts
2018-2019; 0.13 trillion
Hard to make any definitive conclusions from this trend as the revenue dropped noticeably from 2015 to 2016, which was before the tax cuts. 2017-2018 was the weakest but then there was a decent rise for the 2018-2019 slot.
why would you cloud the emotions with facts.
$1trillion deficits are cool
So we can answer; which countries do you classify as major economies?
Do you want to ask me the same question?
