Paul Ryan and GOP fiscal hypocrisy

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Tiger in NC, Jun 14, 2012.

  1. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Uhhh, . . . OK.

    Where?

    Knock yourself out. I posted a graph and its source.

    Irrelevant to the budget surplus question. As for the National Debt . . . I assume principal is paid down, since the interest due has been paid in the budget.

    {*sigh*} Deficit and debt are two different things. How is it that you still confuse this? If the national debt increased by 10 dollars, it has nothing to do with the fact that there was a surplus in the annual budget. If there was a budget surplus of 10 dollars and it was applied to the debt, the debt would level. if there was a budget surplus of 15 dollars, the debt would go down. If there was a surplus of 5 dollars, the debt's rate of increase would have gone down.

    No, it is you that said that. I said that, adjusted for inflation, the debt leveled and went down under Clinton.

    It sounds like you are doing a lot of assuming. Why don't you get the facts and post them? Then we can argue them.

    How else could the Treasury report income from bond sales other than as income? This is an accounting question. Ask Supa.
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Ahem, how long will this take? Approximately forever?
     
  3. LSUsupaFan

    LSUsupaFan Founding Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,787
    Likes Received:
    1,207
    So what. There is no advantage for the government to retire debt early.
     
  4. Atreus21

    Atreus21 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    522
    You ignored the rest of my question. How does inflation cause the raw balance of the debt to increase?

    Bolded: "If there was a budget surplus of 15 dollars, the debt would go down."

    If there was a budget surplus of $123 billion in FY 1999, the debt would go down. The debt didn't go down. It increased by $130 billion.

    Okay. Then what caused the raw balance of the debt to increase if not spending?

    I suppose they could count it as they do any other debt. Lent money isn't income.
     
  5. KyleK

    KyleK Who, me? Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    9,109
    Likes Received:
    3,366
    Why not? If we paid off all of the debt, wouldn't we need less dollars to operate? As in if I am not paying interest on credit cards, I don't need as much money every month to meet the bills.
     
  6. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    Because the interest on the national debt is lower than the cost it would impose on us to pay it off.

    The us has good credit and borrows at extremely low rates.
     
  7. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Say what? Don't you think that the 455 billion that we spend a year on interest on the NAtional Debt is a HUGE WASTE for the taxpayers? Don't you think we'd be better off without it? I can't tell you how much better off I am since my mortgages have been paid off.
     
  8. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Beats me, I'm not an economist. But that is a fact noted in the graph I posted, go look it up.

    Adjusted for inflation it did go down.

    Magic.

    Not to a citizen at tax time. But a government moving money between the Treasury and a Government Trust must track the money it receives and the money it pays out in some fashion. You haven't really established that Clinton's budget included borrowed money from trust funds as income in the first place.

    Amigo, you are like a little one who keeps asking "Why" no matter how much you answer. We shall have to just agree to disagree on this one. At least until August. I'm leaving on vacation in the morning for 3 weeks. I will likely touch base with TF on the iPad from time to time to follow the Tigers, but I doubt that I will have any time for lengthy debates in FSA for a while.
     
  9. Tiger in NC

    Tiger in NC There's a sucker born everyday...

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2011
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    1,806
  10. Atreus21

    Atreus21 Founding Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2003
    Messages:
    1,660
    Likes Received:
    522
    Yes it did. But the debt in fact went up. That means more money was spent than received. That's a deficit.

    Hey, it was you who made the claim that the debt went up because of inflation. One would think you are obliged to defend that.

    As I said earlier, you own factcheck article established that. Naturally, you asked me to substantiate your own link.

    "Clinton’s large budget surpluses also owe much to the Social Security tax on payrolls. Social Security taxes now bring in more than the cost of current benefits, and the "Social Security surplus" makes the total deficit or surplus figures look better than they would if Social Security wasn’t counted. But even if we remove Social Security from the equation, there was a surplus of $1.9 billion in fiscal 1999 and $86.4 billion in fiscal 2000. So any way you count it, the federal budget was balanced and the deficit was erased, if only for a while."

    What that article fails to include is that Social Security was only one of the trust funds whose surpluses are included in the calculation of an annual budget surplus or deficit.

    :rolleyes:
    Have a pleasant vacation.
     

Share This Page