The Trump Economy

[row_33]

that seems utterly impossible but thanks DC, as always!!

 

 

[/dev/null]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/former-speaker-boehner-deficit-will-be-number-one-issue-in-six-months.html

[B-Man]

59 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/13/former-speaker-boehner-deficit-will-be-number-one-issue-in-six-months.html

 

Typical Boner B.S.

 

Jobs will be the issue..........as always...............but he won't say that.

 

.

[B-Man]

I WAS TOLD THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE:

 

 Congressional Budget Office: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves. 

 

“Last June, the CBO said GDP growth for 2018 would be just 2%. Now it figures growth will be 3.3% — a significant upward revision.

 

It also boosted its forecast for 2019 from a meager 1.5% to a respectable 2.4%.”

 

 

 

 

UPDATE: Unexpectedly! “Those who lack any understanding of how the world works are continually surprised.”

 

.

[Deranged Rhino]

Trump wrote an op-ed today: 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/04/17/donald-trump-tax-day-economy-column/518919002/

[/dev/null]

15 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Trump wrote an op-ed today: 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/04/17/donald-trump-tax-day-economy-column/518919002/

 

That's more than 140 characters

[DC Tom]

4 hours ago, /dev/null said:

 

That's more than 140 characters

 

It's a bigly tweet.

[row_33]

17 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's a bigly tweet.

 

edit it for me and just give me when he goes into CAPITALS ONLY

 

 

[Koko78]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

edit it for me and just give me when he goes into CAPITALS ONLY

 

 

 

MAGA.

[row_33]

13 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

MAGA.

 

Trump comes in when it's capitalized and ranting...

[TPS]

On 4/14/2018 at 9:45 PM, B-Man said:

I WAS TOLD THIS WAS IMPOSSIBLE:

 

 Congressional Budget Office: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves. 

 

“Last June, the CBO said GDP growth for 2018 would be just 2%. Now it figures growth will be 3.3% — a significant upward revision.

 

It also boosted its forecast for 2019 from a meager 1.5% to a respectable 2.4%.”

 

 

 

 

UPDATE: Unexpectedly! “Those who lack any understanding of how the world works are continually surprised.”

 

.

This reading of the CBO changes is biased toward the tax cuts, suggesting they explain the entire growth impact, hence supporting the conclusion: "tax cuts pay for themselves."

 

First, as I've posted in this thread, anything that causes bigger deficits is expansionary. The CBO's new forecast states the increased growth is a consequence of the tax cut and two spending bills the Republicans passed. For example, they attribute the increase in next year's growth rate (from 2 to 3.3%) about equally to the tax cuts and spending increases. This year's higher projection is due to spending increases and the tax cuts, especially the one-time allowance for 100% expensing of equipment, which will raise investment spending this year at the expense of future years.

 

As I said, The projected higher growth is a consequence of both tax cuts and higher spending. According to the CBO, Tax cuts and higher spending without additional growth would cause accumulated deficits to rise by $2.6 trillion, but the additional growth from the stimulus--tax cuts and spending--increases revenues by $1.1 trillion, leaving an increase of $1.5 trillion. Increased Deficits, regardless of whether they are caused by tax cuts or spending or both, always stimulate the economy which helps mitigate the  the increased deficits they cause. 

 

The author also states that revenues rise every year going forward, which is not true. For the next 4 years, beginning with 2018, revenues as a share of GDP are projected to be 16.6, 16.5, 16.7, and 16.7.   Revenues were 17.3% of GDP in 2017.  As I stated in other posts, revenues tend to decline in the first two years after tax cuts. Revenues are projected to fall by 0.7% of GDP from 2017 to 2018, and 0.1% from 2018 to 2019.

 

Finally, the author neglects to mention that many of the tax cuts will phase out after 2025, so revenues are projected to rise significantly, from 17.5% in 2025 to 18.1% in 2026, and 18.5% in 2027.

 

Tax cuts stimulate the economy, but they never end up "paying for themselves" over time...

[/dev/null]

8 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

edit it for me and just give me when he goes into CAPITALS ONLY

 

 

Did he just buy their hockey team?

[3rdnlng]

4 hours ago, TPS said:

This reading of the CBO changes is biased toward the tax cuts, suggesting they explain the entire growth impact, hence supporting the conclusion: "tax cuts pay for themselves."

 

First, as I've posted in this thread, anything that causes bigger deficits is expansionary. The CBO's new forecast states the increased growth is a consequence of the tax cut and two spending bills the Republicans passed. For example, they attribute the increase in next year's growth rate (from 2 to 3.3%) about equally to the tax cuts and spending increases. This year's higher projection is due to spending increases and the tax cuts, especially the one-time allowance for 100% expensing of equipment, which will raise investment spending this year at the expense of future years.

 

As I said, The projected higher growth is a consequence of both tax cuts and higher spending. According to the CBO, Tax cuts and higher spending without additional growth would cause accumulated deficits to rise by $2.6 trillion, but the additional growth from the stimulus--tax cuts and spending--increases revenues by $1.1 trillion, leaving an increase of $1.5 trillion. Increased Deficits, regardless of whether they are caused by tax cuts or spending or both, always stimulate the economy which helps mitigate the  the increased deficits they cause. 

 

The author also states that revenues rise every year going forward, which is not true. For the next 4 years, beginning with 2018, revenues as a share of GDP are projected to be 16.6, 16.5, 16.7, and 16.7.   Revenues were 17.3% of GDP in 2017.  As I stated in other posts, revenues tend to decline in the first two years after tax cuts. Revenues are projected to fall by 0.7% of GDP from 2017 to 2018, and 0.1% from 2018 to 2019.

 

Finally, the author neglects to mention that many of the tax cuts will phase out after 2025, so revenues are projected to rise significantly, from 17.5% in 2025 to 18.1% in 2026, and 18.5% in 2027.

 

Tax cuts stimulate the economy, but they never end up "paying for themselves" over time...

You do know that the law presently required those tax cuts tp be sunsetted, but the GOP is working on making them permanent, don't you?

[/dev/null]

4 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

You do know that the law presently required those tax cuts tp be sunsetted

As all laws should

 

Tax cuts.  Obamacare.  Gun Control.  Whatever

Instead of passing a new law to fix a broken law, laws should sunset and either be replaced or abandoned.

Same with Executive Orders

[TPS]

Just now, 3rdnlng said:

You do know that the law presently required those tax cuts tp be sunsetted, but the GOP is working on making them permanent, don't you?

That doesn't change the current estimates, which is what I commented on. In fact, if the GOP does make them permanent, Then the CBO will revise the revenue numbers down.

[TakeYouToTasker]

2 hours ago, TPS said:

That doesn't change the current estimates, which is what I commented on. In fact, if the GOP does make them permanent, Then the CBO will revise the revenue numbers down.

 

You're making an empty political point by relying on projected impacts absent context.

 

That's an exceptionally ****ty thing for someone forwarding himself as a professional to do.

Edited April 19, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker

[TPS]

8 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

You're making an empty political point by relying on projected impacts absent context.

 

That's an exceptionally ****ty thing for someone forwarding himself as a professional to do.

It's not political. Don't let your personal feelings get in the way here. 

 

The CBO is evaluating the economic impact on deficits from the given legislation. As it is currently written, most of the personal tax cuts expire in 2025--that's a fact. The CBO's revenue estimates go up when the tax cuts expire--a fact. If the GOP is able to make those cuts permanent after 2025, then the CBO will revise the revenue numbers down--a fact. There is nothing political about this. The article, on the other hand, had a political bent to make the tax cuts appear to have less of an impact on deficits than the reality.

 

 

 

[row_33]

11 hours ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

You're making an empty political point by relying on projected impacts absent context.

 

That's an exceptionally ****ty thing for someone forwarding himself as a professional to do.

 

that's why TPS is on ignore, sort of a wistful one because there was SOME potential there for engaging in some useful thought....

 

not worth it though for the dooshiness...

 

 

[gatorbait]

18 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

that's why TPS is on ignore, sort of a wistful one because there was SOME potential there for engaging in some useful thought....

 

not worth it though for the dooshiness...

 

 

I love how you are so quick to label other people’s posts garbage and ignore-worthy. Have you read your posts back to yourself? You are a rambling retarded Canadian who should worry about his own country. Caring that much about another country’s politics is pathetic. 

[Warren Zevon]

2 minutes ago, gatorbait said:

I love how you are so quick to label other people’s posts garbage and ignore-worthy. Have you read your posts back to yourself? You are a rambling retarded Canadian who should worry about his own country. Caring that much about another country’s politics is pathetic. 

 

You're only complementing it. Don't bother.