U.S. Government Set to Borrow Nearly $1 Trillion This Year, Increase of 84%

salto Senior Member
2,693 posts 14 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Feb 13, 2018 11:19 AM
posted by QuakerOats

Feds collect record amount of taxes in January, resulting in a budget surplus for the month.  On track for a lower deficit vs last year. 

 

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/feds-collect-record-taxes-first-month-under-tax-cut-run-surplus

 

 

I know my taxes went up under drumpf.  Screwing the single filers on taxes, no doubt.  

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 312 reps Joined Apr 2010
Tue, Feb 13, 2018 11:26 AM
posted by salto

I know my taxes went up under drumpf.  Screwing the single filers on taxes, no doubt.  

I have a hard time believing this considering your job.  The standard deduction will be doubled for next tax season, and if I were a betting man, you probably have started to see more in your pay check. 

CenterBHSFan 333 - I'm only half evil
7,259 posts 46 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Feb 13, 2018 2:19 PM
posted by salto

I know my taxes went up under drumpf.  Screwing the single filers on taxes, no doubt.  

As far as income tax (and returns) the only thing that would screw you over is if you had gas/oil checks, which are classified as rents. Those will reduce returns.

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, Mar 13, 2018 3:01 PM
posted by QuakerOats

Feds collect record amount of taxes in January, resulting in a budget surplus for the month.  On track for a lower deficit vs last year. 

 

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/feds-collect-record-taxes-first-month-under-tax-cut-run-surplus

 

 

Hilarious that you would go with January before people even amended their W-4's. But here you go. 

U.S. Posts Biggest Budget Deficit since 2012

Fiscal income dropped to $156 billion, down 9 percent from a year earlier, while spending rose 2 percent to $371 billion, the Treasury Department said on Monday. The deficit for the fiscal year that began in October widened to $391 billion, compared with a $351 billion shortfall the same period a year earlier, according to the Treasury report.

I have been wrong all along. All I've ever had to do to get the budget deficits I want is vote Republican because "conservatives" will cheer them wildly or shrug at worst when the man at the top has an (R) next to his name. And, now that the markets seem to know that former hawk Jerome Powell won't cut off the deficit stimulus with premature rate hikes (Even the Establishment Republicans in the Swamp drop their principles when their team runs the show!), Trump's deficits can make America Great Again! 

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 312 reps Joined Apr 2010
Tue, Mar 13, 2018 3:08 PM

Although BS jerks off to deficits, he is right.  The republicans (the majority of them at least) are full of shit when they pretend they are fiscally conservative.   It's the republican version of dems pretending they care about minorities. 

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, Mar 14, 2018 3:01 PM
posted by like_that

The republicans (the majority of them at least) are full of shit when they pretend they are fiscally conservative.

Because none of them will ever be accountable.  Once you cut an entitlement, you're racist and hate the poor and grandma...and you're out of office.  It would be nice to see some modest belt tightening just to hold spending flat year-over-year.

No one knows how long the global deflation premium will last, but debt does matter.  That equation hasn't changed, but the artificially low interest rates that sustain it aren't sustainable.  When rates return to historical averages in the neighborhood of 5-6% (and they will), the deficit and mountain of debt will absolutely choke the economy - you'll be talking over $1T in interest payments just to service the debt.

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Thu, Mar 15, 2018 8:17 AM
posted by gut

Because none of them will ever be accountable.  Once you cut an entitlement, you're racist and hate the poor and grandma...and you're out of office.  It would be nice to see some modest belt tightening just to hold spending flat year-over-year.

No one knows how long the global deflation premium will last, but debt does matter.  That equation hasn't changed, but the artificially low interest rates that sustain it aren't sustainable.  When rates return to historical averages in the neighborhood of 5-6% (and they will), the deficit and mountain of debt will absolutely choke the economy - you'll be talking over $1T in interest payments just to service the debt.

How many years do people get to say that interest rates are "artificially low" before they realize there was nothing "natural" about the historical averages which were just as much a product of deliberate Federal Government policy choices? How many decades can you have these "artificially low" rates credibly deemed "unsustainable" even when they've been sustained for a quarter of a century even as material progress and the well-being of humanity continues dramatically around the world?

For the true believer, no matter how many times prophecy fails, the cleansing of sin and redemption is always yet to come. 

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Thu, Mar 15, 2018 11:24 AM
posted by BoatShoes

How many years do people get to say that interest rates are "artificially low" before they realize there was nothing "natural" about the historical averages which were just as much a product of deliberate Federal Government policy choices? How many decades can you have these "artificially low" rates credibly deemed "unsustainable" even when they've been sustained for a quarter of a century even as material progress and the well-being of humanity continues dramatically around the world?

For the true believer, no matter how many times prophecy fails, the cleansing of sin and redemption is always yet to come. 

LMFAO.  A quarter of a century?  Are you being deliberately obtuse or willfully ignorant?

Again, it's hard to argue with you when you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.  Are you actually attempting to argue higher historical rates were the result of govt intervention?  You're familiar with Paul Volker, correct?  You do realilze it's a pretty common view (among economists and people who actually study and know these things) that easy money (a.k.a artificially low rates) was a major factor in the internet and housing bubbles, which destroyed tremendous wealth and triggered significant recessions.

 

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, May 1, 2018 3:22 PM
posted by gut

LMFAO.  A quarter of a century?  Are you being deliberately obtuse or willfully ignorant?

Again, it's hard to argue with you when you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.  Are you actually attempting to argue higher historical rates were the result of govt intervention?  You're familiar with Paul Volker, correct?  You do realilze it's a pretty common view (among economists and people who actually study and know these things) that easy money (a.k.a artificially low rates) was a major factor in the internet and housing bubbles, which destroyed tremendous wealth and triggered significant recessions.. 

The quarter of a century reference was my suggestion that even in the future as rates remain low - and they will - you'll continue to say they're artificially low. The question becomes at what point do we decide that there's nothing "artificial" about the lowness? How long can something go on "artificially" before people concede that there's nothing "Artificial" going on. It was also a reference to the Japanese who HAVE had rates that low for that long. There's nothing more or less "artificial" about high rates or low rates - in all cases they derive from the market's expectations regarding the behavior of the sovereign monetary authority - aka government intervention and policy. 

 

And yes I'm familiar with Paul Volcker and my God if you don't realize that the Federal Reserve setting higher short term interest rates raises them across the yield curve IS GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION and IS what ultimately resulted in higher interest rates across the yield curve in the past. The Federal Reserve intervening federal funds market and the expectations therefrom in the markets are what drive interest rates in the economy. There is not and has never been anything "natural" about this process. It all derives from government policy choices. 

I'm aware that there is a contingent that thinks the Fed kept rates too low for too long and I happen to disagree that this was a primary cause of the great recession. As Milton Friedman argued - lower interest rates result when money has been too tight to get the economy going adequately enough to allow the monetary authority to allow higher interest rates w/o recession.

Here's an article about Ben Bernanke making this same point while referencing Milton Friedman: 

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernanke-on-milton-friedman--milton-friedman-on-the-fed-today-2012-10

His answer was excellent. He pointed out that Friedman advocated QE for Japan during its struggle against deflation and weak growth. He also recalled one of  Friedman's most important lessons, that low interest rates are not the same as loose policy.

This point — and again this goes back to Evans this morning — can best be grasped by thinking about the '70s inflation, when rates were high. Surely nobody thought those high rates were an indication of overly tight money. Ultra-low rates are evidence that money is still too tight, since it means monetary policy is failing to induce the desired inflation.

Kind of funny if you ask me that your views are more in line with Obama's terrible Fed Appointee Jeremy "Bubble-Popping" Stein and mine are more in line with Bernanke and Friedman. 

 

 

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, May 1, 2018 3:32 PM

U.S. Treasury sets first-quarter record $488 billion of treasuries issued in the first quarter! Where's Quaker and Gut proclaiming the inevitable demise of the United States?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/economy/2018/04/30/treasury-borrowing-set-record-488-billion/567166002/

And how bout Steve Mnuchin giving away the game and making the point that I have been making all along:

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said late Monday that he was not concerned that the increased borrowing could send interest rates surging and threaten overall economic growth. 

"There is a lot of supply but I think the market can handle it"

Asked if he is worried that stock markets could be rattled with rates climbing after so many years of low rates, Mnuchin said, " I have tremendous confidence in Chairman (Jerome) Powell and his leadership at the Fed.

Alas - despite record breaking deficits interest rates on treasuries are ultimately a function of Fed Policy - right from the mouth of the Treasury Secretary.

gut Senior Member
18,369 posts 93 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, May 1, 2018 4:25 PM
posted by BoatShoes

Alas - despite record breaking deficits interest rates on treasuries are ultimately a function of Fed Policy - right from the mouth of the Treasury Secretary.

LOL, ok.  Again, you need to start reading some people who actually have skin in the game and aren't driving a political agenda if you really want to understand how things work.

BoatShoes Senior Member
5,991 posts 23 reps Joined Nov 2009
Tue, May 1, 2018 5:16 PM
posted by gut

LOL, ok.  Again, you need to start reading some people who actually have skin in the game and aren't driving a political agenda if you really want to understand how things work.

You're right. The U.S. Treasury Secretary and former CIO of Goldman Sachs - a primary dealer of Treasuries - surely doesn't have a CLUE!

 

QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009
Wed, May 2, 2018 10:55 AM
posted by BoatShoes

U.S. Treasury sets first-quarter record $488 billion of treasuries issued in the first quarter! Where's Quaker and Gut proclaiming the inevitable demise of the United States?

 

The demise will come; you cannot spend nor overly borrow your way to prosperity.

 

And still, no one can ever explain how the one-time, $1 trillion TARP spending in '09, which caused federal spending to go from $2.6 to $3.6 trillion, NEVER WENT AWAY. 

 

Drain the swamp. 

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 312 reps Joined Apr 2010
QuakerOats Senior Member
11,701 posts 55 reps Joined Nov 2009
Thu, May 17, 2018 2:20 PM

Although we did just post a record monthly surplus of $218 billion in April.

SportsAndLady Senior Member
39,070 posts 24 reps Joined Nov 2009
Thu, May 17, 2018 4:22 PM
posted by like_that

Our "fiscally conservative" republicans...

 

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=2&vote=00099#position

Hard to see from mobile, what was the vote on? 

like_that 1st Team All-PWN
29,228 posts 312 reps Joined Apr 2010
Thu, May 17, 2018 5:43 PM
posted by SportsAndLady

Hard to see from mobile, what was the vote on? 

Rand Paul's bill to balance the budget by 2023.

Login

Register

Already have an account? Login