Trump Hits A New High-Water Mark: The Biggest Federal Deficit In 6 Years

[phands]

The shitgibbon is a financial disaster, while claiming to be a great businessman...

President Donald Trump likes to boast that he’s breaking records with the latest low unemployment figures. Here’s another record for his administration: The 2018 federal deficit hit the highest level of the last six years.

The deficit jumped 17 percent (or by $113 billion) to $779 billion at the end of Trump’s first fiscal year, according to final figures released Monday by the Treasury Department. That’s mostly due to the massive corporate tax cut that slashed rates from 35 percent to 21 percent, choking revenue for spending, which climbed 3 percent. Much of that was a hike in defense spending and money to pay interest on the climbing federal debt, CNN reported.

The U.S. government’s $523 billion in interest payments to service its debt in 2018 — the highest ever — was more than the entire economic output of Belgium this year, Bloomberg reported.

Corporate tax collections in the U.S. fell 22 percent, or $76 billion, in the fiscal year, which ended Sept. 30.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-deficit-highest-six-years_us_5bc545ece4b0a8f17ee4c5d6

 

[PyramidHead]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

 

[Horatio Parker]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Exactly. It's more a matter of how it's spent and who benefits.

 

[marc]

I think most people would not criticize him for deficits existing. The criticism would be for other reasons, such as the hypocrisy of the Republicans, moaning about the debt/deficit whenever a Democrat is in office, and then greatly increasing it whenever they are in charge. Another reason would be the asshole's empty bragging on how he would eliminate the debt/deficit with his superior business skills.

Hell, just last week I heard a relative talking about how 'they claim Obama cut the deficit in half, but it keeps going up'. I was busy in another room so couldn't break in to correct him, that Obama did in fact cut the deficit in half.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Deficits aren't bad when they're needed, but they're not a viable long term strategy and eventually you need to get shit under control.

I'd suggest that you kill off Medicare and Social Security and use the savings to help pay down the debt - after you build those new aircraft carriers to protect you from the guys in caves with pistols, of course.

 

[Horatio Parker]

I was busy in another room so couldn't break in to correct him, that Obama did in fact cut the deficit in half.

Which helped set the stage for Trump. Obama's deficits were too low to offset the GFC.

- - - Updated - - -

Remember that the other side of a govt deficit is private savings.

If you want surplus on the govt side, then exports must also be in surplus or else private sector holdings will be drawn down.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Obama's huge deficits came due to a massive drop in tax revenues caused by a massive global recession. Additional deficit spending was made with the help propel the economy. Inflation wasn't an issue both due to the contraction in the economy and the massive devaluation of housing across the US.

Trump's huge deficit is by far a record for an economy that is doing positively. This deficit is caused by overspending and under taxing. The result, in the immediate future is higher inflation. With interest rates very low, if inflation can't be controlled, there is a threat that the economy will slow down and inflation with continue to grow. To makes matters even worse, all of this is intentional to force spending cuts on important programs (non-military of course) to deal with the deficits.

 

[PyramidHead]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Obama's huge deficits came due to a massive drop in tax revenues caused by a massive global recession. Additional deficit spending was made with the help propel the economy. Inflation wasn't an issue both due to the contraction in the economy and the massive devaluation of housing across the US.

Trump's huge deficit is by far a record for an economy that is doing positively. This deficit is caused by overspending and under taxing. The result, in the immediate future is higher inflation. With interest rates very low, if inflation can't be controlled, there is a threat that the economy will slow down and inflation with continue to grow. To makes matters even worse, all of this is intentional to force spending cuts on important programs (non-military of course) to deal with the deficits.

I don't know what it means for an economy to be "doing positively" anymore*, but if the record is for modern-day capitalist societies having low unemployment then I suppose you're right about that. I'm glad Horatio Parker chimed in because he's more erudite than me at explaining these things, but my sense is that regardless of the economic situation, ANY deficit can be managed indefinitely with the appropriate fiscal policies. You're probably also right that our current government is not likely to implement those policies anytime soon.


*I mean, you could argue that as long as there is productive work to be done in the areas of infrastructure, health care, education, housing for the homeless, and all the other ways our economy is failing the poor and middle class, there's a clear-cut need for major deficit spending, albeit targeted at those endpoints and not simply added to the Klein bottle that goes back to the top where it originated. None of which is to say our current situation is promising in that regard, but it's more than just a glance at the number and a comparison with the unemployment rate, depending on your perspective. Or am I wrong?

 

[Ford]

Deficits aren't bad when they're needed, but they're not a viable long term strategy and eventually you need to get shit under control.

I'd suggest that you kill off Medicare and Social Security and use the savings to help pay down the debt - after you build those new aircraft carriers to protect you from the guys in caves with pistols, of course.

Listen, those guys in caves are getting more sophisticated. Did you know, for example, that if we don't bomb them soon, those guys in Iran might have a nuclear weapon in 10 years? Do you know how terrifying it is for a country with thousands of warheads to face a nation with a single nuke?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Deficits aren't bad when they're needed, but they're not a viable long term strategy and eventually you need to get shit under control.

I'd suggest that you kill off Medicare and Social Security and use the savings to help pay down the debt - after you build those new aircraft carriers to protect you from the guys in caves with pistols, of course.

Listen, those guys in caves are getting more sophisticated. Did you know, for example, that if we don't bomb them soon, those guys in Iran might have a nuclear weapon in 10 years? Do you know how terrifying it is for a country with thousands of warheads to face a nation with a single nuke?

To quote George Clooney (because a man that magnificent looking is obviously correct), "I'm not afraid of the man who wants ten nuclear weapons. I'm terrified of the man who only wants one".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Deficits aren't bad when they're needed, but they're not a viable long term strategy and eventually you need to get shit under control.

I'd suggest that you kill off Medicare and Social Security and use the savings to help pay down the debt - after you build those new aircraft carriers to protect you from the guys in caves with pistols, of course.

Listen, those guys in caves are getting more sophisticated. Did you know, for example, that if we don't bomb them soon, those guys in Iran might have a nuclear weapon in 10 years? Do you know how terrifying it is for a country with thousands of warheads to face a nation with a single nuke?

To quote George Clooney (because a man that magnificent looking is obviously correct), "I'm not afraid of the man who wants ten nuclear weapons. I'm terrified of the man who only wants one".

Nuclear weapons require balance. Iran gets it, Saudi Arabia gets it. That isn't great.

North Korea is an exception because of the nuclear umbrella with the US.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Obama's huge deficits came due to a massive drop in tax revenues caused by a massive global recession. Additional deficit spending was made with the help propel the economy. Inflation wasn't an issue both due to the contraction in the economy and the massive devaluation of housing across the US.

Trump's huge deficit is by far a record for an economy that is doing positively. This deficit is caused by overspending and under taxing. The result, in the immediate future is higher inflation. With interest rates very low, if inflation can't be controlled, there is a threat that the economy will slow down and inflation with continue to grow. To makes matters even worse, all of this is intentional to force spending cuts on important programs (non-military of course) to deal with the deficits.

I don't know what it means for an economy to be "doing positively" anymore*, but if the record is for modern-day capitalist societies having low unemployment then I suppose you're right about that. I'm glad Horatio Parker chimed in because he's more erudite than me at explaining these things, but my sense is that regardless of the economic situation, ANY deficit can be managed indefinitely with the appropriate fiscal policies. You're probably also right that our current government is not likely to implement those policies anytime soon.


*I mean, you could argue that as long as there is productive work to be done in the areas of infrastructure, health care, education, housing for the homeless, and all the other ways our economy is failing the poor and middle class, there's a clear-cut need for major deficit spending, albeit targeted at those endpoints and not simply added to the Klein bottle that goes back to the top where it originated. None of which is to say our current situation is promising in that regard, but it's more than just a glance at the number and a comparison with the unemployment rate, depending on your perspective. Or am I wrong?

Positively in the sense, unemployment is low and we have GDP growth. The economy ain't booming and wages aren't going up, but I don't want to make it sound as if the economy is dire like some partisan dipshit. In the run up to the '08 crash, the economy was showing signs of issues. Right now our economy has the lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I'll need to look at some websites and check to see how the economy handled on after that. I'm assuming it was totally AWESOME and we had YUGE growth thanks to some really forward thinking economic policy in the White House.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Uhmmmmm, no. A massive tax cut program was a prime part of Trump's campaign promises. He peddled it repeatedly. If anything, the final tax cut bill passed by the GOP Congress was less than what Trump demanded. So if we got a massive deficit, Trump indeed gets credit for it. The GOP Congress was happy to oblige him, and did so. It is not like the GOP Congress did this without help from Trump, or over his objections. Trump did not veto this plan and force Congress to over ride his veto.

He later crowed about his victory getting these massive tax cuts. He gets credit for all of this and the resulting deficits.

 

[Elixir]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

Uhmmmmm, no. A massive tax cut program was a prime part of Trump's campaign promises. He peddled it repeatedly. If anything, the final tax cut bill passed by the GOP Congress was less than what Trump demanded. So if we got a massive deficit, Trump indeed gets credit for it. The GOP Congress was happy to oblige him, and did so. It is not like the GOP Congress did this without help from Trump, or over his objections. Trump did not veto this plan and force Congress to over ride his veto.

He later crowed about his victory getting these massive tax cuts. He gets credit for all of this and the resulting deficits.

... as well as the "deficit" excuse to further raid social security and medicare, then blame it on Democrats (Cheato will be well out of office by the time these chickens come home to roost). This rethuglican administration is far and away the most corrupt one of my nearly 70 year lifetime, probably the most corrupt one EVER, and far more corrupt than I ever thought possible under a government with "separation of powers" - which also seem to be going the way of the dinosaur.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blamed rising federal deficits and debt on a bipartisan unwillingness to contain spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, and said he sees little chance of a major deficit reduction deal while Republicans control Congress and the White House.

“It’s disappointing, but it’s not a Republican problem,” McConnell said Tuesday in an interview with Bloomberg News when asked about the rising deficits and debt. “It’s a bipartisan problem: unwillingness to address the real drivers of the debt by doing anything to adjust those programs to the demographics of America in the future.”

Lucy and the football.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ames-entitlements-not-gop-for-rising-deficits

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blamed rising federal deficits and debt on a bipartisan unwillingness to contain spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, and said he sees little chance of a major deficit reduction deal while Republicans control Congress and the White House.

“It’s disappointing, but it’s not a Republican problem,” McConnell said Tuesday in an interview with Bloomberg News when asked about the rising deficits and debt. “It’s a bipartisan problem: unwillingness to address the real drivers of the debt by doing anything to adjust those programs to the demographics of America in the future.”

Lucy and the football.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ames-entitlements-not-gop-for-rising-deficits

Apparently having control of the House, Senate, and White House isn't enough to cut spending.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell blamed rising federal deficits and debt on a bipartisan unwillingness to contain spending on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, and said he sees little chance of a major deficit reduction deal while Republicans control Congress and the White House.

“It’s disappointing, but it’s not a Republican problem,” McConnell said Tuesday in an interview with Bloomberg News when asked about the rising deficits and debt. “It’s a bipartisan problem: unwillingness to address the real drivers of the debt by doing anything to adjust those programs to the demographics of America in the future.”

Lucy and the football.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ames-entitlements-not-gop-for-rising-deficits

Apparently having control of the House, Senate, and White House isn't enough to cut spending.

They want the Dems to do it. And Dems buy into it. Witness Obama and his Grand Bargain.

Pelosi and pay-go must go.

 

[Patooka]

Here's my opinion. If you consider yourself a free market pioneer, proclaim through twitter every stock market increase that it was your doing and your doing alone, then you are accountable for every financial measurement.

Therefore, this is on Trump. He is responsible.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I'll bash Trump for a lot of things, but I'm not partisan enough to suddenly care about federal budget deficits just because they occur under a Republican president. Deficit spending by itself is not a cause for alarm.

If the deficit goes up during a boom market, that's cause for alarm. If the deficit isn't going down during the boom market every voter should be up in arms smashing the panic button. But hey, that's just me.

 

[bleubird]

I hope I get all my SS and Medicare before I die.Good luck to all you young ones.