Donald Trump Releases New - Someone Else Will Balance Budget Blueprint

[Jimmy Higgins]

link

The Donald Trump Administration has announced they have given up trying to cut Federal Spending and will lay off that responsibility to other Administration(s). Table S-2 indicates that a dime won't be cut from Domestic Spending until Trump's final year of his first term, and substantial cuts won't take place until the next person takes his place after the 2020 election.

The Administration has indicated that they are sure the future Administrations will do well to enact the gibberish and hopeful fancies of "addressing wasteful spending, fraud, and abuse in healthcare" so well, that nearly $100 billion be saved in such spending during President At least XLVII's first year in office.

Another $150 billion will be saved in President At least XLVII's first year thanks to "empowering states and consumers to reform health care". Of course, this will be thanks to President At least XLVI's efforts as the Trump Administration has given up even trying to address this in their administration, as they actually expect to spend more money on "empowering states and consumers to reform health care" up until the next President's first budget.

Trump's vision of the economy is definitely a glowing ambition of future Presidencies, and not his own. His faith in the future Presidents of the US is so huge, that the deficit is expected to drop to 0.6% of GDP in 2029 during President At least XLVII's first year, dropping from 4.5% in Trump's final year. Until then, Trump plans on meager changes to drop the annual deficit from 3.8% during 2018 to 4.5% in 2021.

And lets not forget how the economy will continue to chug despite cutting non-military discretionary spending by about half, when including inflation, between 2019 and 2029. Only the greatest of leaders can pull off that maneuver.

People rarely peg Trump as an optimist, but lets peg him... he is an optimist in America's future Presidents accomplishing what he claimed he'd do, but didn't even come remotely close.

 

[untermensche]

Cut defense spending.

End all overseas military activity.

Develop an actual strategy of defense.

 

[funinspace]

Yeah, it is going to be funny (in a sick way) when Repugnicins become deficit hawks again in January 2021...I can hear the howling about 'out of control entitlement spending'.

 

[untermensche]

Yeah, it is going to be funny (in a sick way) when Repugnicins become deficit hawks again in January 2021...I can hear the howling about 'out of control entitlement spending'.

It's Lucy pulling the ball from Charlie Brown.

It's the Republicans saying one thing when not in power and doing the exact opposite when they have power.

And a nation full of Charlie Browns that believe them every time.

 

[funinspace]

Yeah, it is going to be funny (in a sick way) when Repugnicins become deficit hawks again in January 2021...I can hear the howling about 'out of control entitlement spending'.

It's Lucy pulling the ball from Charlie Brown.

It's the Republicans saying one thing when not in power and doing the exact opposite when they have power.

And a nation full of Charlie Browns that believe them every time.

There might be fewer Charlie Browns this time, as it seems that a large majority actually got the memo that the tax cut was in fact a huge tax cut for the top 10% (and especially the top 1%).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, it is going to be funny (in a sick way) when Repugnicins become deficit hawks again in January 2021...I can hear the howling about 'out of control entitlement spending'.

It's Lucy pulling the ball from Charlie Brown.

It's the Republicans saying one thing when not in power and doing the exact opposite when they have power.

And a nation full of Charlie Browns that believe them every time.

There might be fewer Charlie Browns this time, as it seems that a large majority actually got the memo that the tax cut was in fact a huge tax cut for the top 10% (and especially the top 1%).

It was more of a corporate tax cut than anything else.

 

[funinspace]

There might be fewer Charlie Browns this time, as it seems that a large majority actually got the memo that the tax cut was in fact a huge tax cut for the top 10% (and especially the top 1%).

It was more of a corporate tax cut than anything else.

And who benefits most when companies buy stocks back, or stock values go up, et.al.? Or are you part of a C Corp or Sub S?

 

[Harry Bosch]

There might be fewer Charlie Browns this time, as it seems that a large majority actually got the memo that the tax cut was in fact a huge tax cut for the top 10% (and especially the top 1%).

It was more of a corporate tax cut than anything else.

And who benefits most when companies buy stocks back, or stock values go up, et.al.? Or are you part of a C Corp or Sub S?

Often times a company buys some stock back in order to beef up equity and improve it's ratios to position it better for growth. Sometimes investors are pushy and want more of a return from a company when times are tough. So, during good times, pay them off and get rid of them. It's a great help to a company to improve ratios and get rid of investors who aren't beneficial.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Cut defense spending.

End all overseas military activity.

Develop an actual strategy of defense.

Yea Baby! That makes sense. Let's allow China to take Taiwan, encourage our allies to develop their own nuclear bombs, allow Russia to take back the former Eastern bloc countries, just let the western democracies fend for themselves. But hey, we'd save 200 billion a year! That wouldn't come close to balancing our budget though...

 

[funinspace]

Cut defense spending.

End all overseas military activity.

Develop an actual strategy of defense.

Yea Baby! That makes sense. Let's allow China to take Taiwan, encourage our allies to develop their own nuclear bombs, allow Russia to take back the former Eastern bloc countries, just let the western democracies fend for themselves. But hey, we'd save 200 billion a year! That wouldn't come close to balancing our budget though...

Not that I'm defending untermensche's notion, but $200 billion is way off, even if we just tried to return to geo-political sanity. Never mind the ridiculous tax cut the Repugs rammed thru in Dec 2017...

The 2000 DoD budget was about $300B, with inflation that would be $440B in 2019.
The 2019 DoD budget is $686B, which would be $246B savings if we return the DoD budget to sanity.
The 2019 OCO costs were $69B covering our blowing up shit in the ME.
The 2000 State Dept budget was $23.6B, with inflation would be $34.6B. Yet the 2019 State Dept $90.3B, so another $56B reduction.

The above totals up to $371B savings.

The VA budget is $200B in 2019, where it was $48B in 2000. Yeah, this one can't be erased. But the sooner we stop mucking around the world blowing up shit, the sooner it will start drawing down.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Cut defense spending.

End all overseas military activity.

Develop an actual strategy of defense.

Yea Baby! That makes sense. Let's allow China to take Taiwan, encourage our allies to develop their own nuclear bombs, allow Russia to take back the former Eastern bloc countries, just let the western democracies fend for themselves. But hey, we'd save 200 billion a year! That wouldn't come close to balancing our budget though...

Not that I'm defending untermensche's notion, but $200 billion is way off, even if we just tried to return to geo-political sanity. Never mind the ridiculous tax cut the Repugs rammed thru in Dec 2017...

The 2000 DoD budget was about $300B, with inflation that would be $440B in 2019.
The 2019 DoD budget is $686B, which would be $246B savings if we return the DoD budget to sanity.
The 2019 OCO costs were $69B covering our blowing up shit in the ME.
The 2000 State Dept budget was $23.6B, with inflation would be $34.6B. Yet the 2019 State Dept $90.3B, so another $56B reduction.

The above totals up to $371B savings.

The VA budget is $200B in 2019, where it was $48B in 2000. Yeah, this one can't be erased. But the sooner we stop mucking around the world blowing up shit, the sooner it will start drawing down.

First off, I don't think that we've "mucked" up the world. Most of our foreign policy long term strategies have been successful to date: stable Europe; maintain sovereignty in eastern Europe and Taiwan, prevent spread of nuclear weapons, stability in South Korea and south China sea; and etc. I'd agree that our polices in the ME have been an unmitigated disaster. I think that we'd be better off if we'd elected better leaders than Bush and Trump. But Obama did some bad things also (Syria and Libya). The larger issue is that the ME is a third country backwards hellhole. No one can fix it. We ought to just pull out and allow their religious civil wars to continue without our participation. But I do think that stability is worth fighting for in Europe and Asia.

Secondly, I'm stunned that you'd want to cut to the state department. This is exactly what Trump is doing. How does it make sense to cut diplomats? Trump's general theme is pull back, create a vacuum, create a wall, separate the US from the world as the world crumbles. If we do start pulling back from our allies, we'd better increase the amount of diplomats and peacemakers that we have, not decrease.

 

[funinspace]

Not that I'm defending untermensche's notion, but $200 billion is way off, even if we just tried to return to geo-political sanity. Never mind the ridiculous tax cut the Repugs rammed thru in Dec 2017...

The 2000 DoD budget was about $300B, with inflation that would be $440B in 2019.
The 2019 DoD budget is $686B, which would be $246B savings if we return the DoD budget to sanity.
The 2019 OCO costs were $69B covering our blowing up shit in the ME.
The 2000 State Dept budget was $23.6B, with inflation would be $34.6B. Yet the 2019 State Dept $90.3B, so another $56B reduction.

The above totals up to $371B savings.

The VA budget is $200B in 2019, where it was $48B in 2000. Yeah, this one can't be erased. But the sooner we stop mucking around the world blowing up shit, the sooner it will start drawing down.

First off, I don't think that we've "mucked" up the world. Most of our foreign policy long term strategies have been successful to date: stable Europe; maintain sovereignty in eastern Europe and Taiwan, prevent spread of nuclear weapons, stability in South Korea and south China sea; and etc.

I think you need to re-read my first sentence w/o injecting your assumptions into it. I guess I should have just said Africa, the Middle East, and Asia instead of the world of mucking...

I'd agree that our polices in the ME have been an unmitigated disaster. I think that we'd be better off if we'd elected better leaders than Bush and Trump. But Obama did some bad things also (Syria and Libya). The larger issue is that the ME is a third country backwards hellhole. No one can fix it. We ought to just pull out and allow their religious civil wars to continue without our participation.

Thank you for reinforcing my point...

But I do think that stability is worth fighting for in Europe and Asia.

Great, but I never brought it up...

Secondly, I'm stunned that you'd want to cut to the state department. This is exactly what Trump is doing. How does it make sense to cut diplomats? Trump's general theme is pull back, create a vacuum, create a wall, separate the US from the world as the world crumbles. If we do start pulling back from our allies, we'd better increase the amount of diplomats and peacemakers that we have, not decrease.

You think the State Dept. budget is up roughly 260% (in real dollars) since 9-11, to cover the cost of more diplomats? Seriously? Was the State Dept. that fucked up in 2000?

PS And I didn't even bring up the fact that our dozen or so spying agencies now have a bigger budget than at the height of the cold war.

 

[funinspace]

link

The Donald Trump Administration has announced they have given up trying to cut Federal Spending and will lay off that responsibility to other Administration(s).

And now FFvC punts on healthcare giving it also to a next administration...maybe a new theme
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/trump-health-care-2020.html

President Trump announced that Republicans would not present a health care overhaul proposal until after the 2020 election, punting on coming up with a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, which the administration is currently fighting in court to invalidate. The issue now will dominate presidential campaigns in the months leading up to the 2020 election.

 

[ZiprHead]

And now FFvC punts on healthcare giving it also to a next administration...maybe a new theme
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/trump-health-care-2020.html

President Trump announced that Republicans would not present a health care overhaul proposal until after the 2020 election, punting on coming up with a replacement for the Affordable Care Act, which the administration is currently fighting in court to invalidate. The issue now will dominate presidential campaigns in the months leading up to the 2020 election.

Note that they're not stopping trying to destroy the AHCA.