Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 18
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732389470457811...

[In fiscal 2012] Tax revenue kept climbing, up 6.4% for the year overall, and at $2.45 trillion it is now close to the historic high it reached in fiscal 2007 before the recession hit. Mr. Obama won't want you to know this, but this revenue increase is occurring under the Bush tax rates that he so desperately wants to raise in the name of getting what he says is merely "a little more in taxes." Individual income tax payments are now up $233 billion over the last two years, or 26%.

This healthy revenue increase comes despite measly economic growth of between 1% and 2%. Imagine the gusher of revenue the feds could get if government got out of the way and let the economy grow faster.

Note, however, that federal spending remains at a new plateau, some $800 billion more than the last pre-recession year of 2007. One way to think about this is that most of the $830 billion stimulus of 2009 has now become part of the federal budget baseline. The "emergency" spending of the stimulus has now become permanent, as we predicted it would.
____________________

Hmmm.... tax revenues are increasing under current rates. So it makes sense to Dems to meddle with that to squeeze a few extra bucks out of the fatcats. This can't end well.

--fleg
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
This can't end well.

But it'll be fair.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Burn the math witch! Take your numbers and go! We don't want your kind around here no more! You're harshing our medically-prescribed mellow!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Note, however, that federal spending remains at a new plateau, some $800 billion more than the last pre-recession year of 2007. One way to think about this is that most of the $830 billion stimulus of 2009 has now become part of the federal budget baseline. The "emergency" spending of the stimulus has now become permanent, as we predicted it would.

I hate when they make obvious errors. The "cost" of the stimulus is over a 10-year period, and somewhere around a third of it was tax cuts.

However, I do agree that the massive expansion of government is the new status quo.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.
-------------------------------------------------------
Military spending isn't really the problem. If you look at those charts as a percentage of GDP military spending always kinda flat, it's social security and Medicare that go from the lower left to the upper right. I mean it's fine if you want to downsize the military, but i don't think it's the problem.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
but the sacred cow needs dehorning.

Absolutely it does.

Entitlement spending is the biggest and fastest growing part of the budget. It needs to be spayed as well as dehorned ASAP!

DoD budget is now less than 17% of federal outlays and declining. In a short time entitlements + debt service will consume >100% of federal revenues.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Entitlement spending is the biggest and fastest growing part of the budget. It needs to be spayed as well as dehorned ASAP!

DoD budget is now less than 17% of federal outlays and declining. In a short time entitlements + debt service will consume >100% of federal revenues.
----------------------------------------------------
Few things, i just heard the president is meeting with labor leaders today and moveon.org, not kidding, SEIU, AFL-CIO, etc, alot of them. They put out a statement, "no benefit cuts to social programs". Here's the video:

http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000129040&play=1

Then i read this:

Democrats also looked unwilling to budge, sticking to their demand for higher rates for the rich.

"Unless you're willing to deal with rates ... you don't really touch the very wealthiest Americans," Rep. John Yarmuth, a Democrat from Kentucky, told MSNBC.
-------------------------------------------------
Just like i thought, eliminating loopholes is not overt enough.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
What deceptive commentary. First, the chart attached to the linked article is for total federal revenue, not federal income tax revenue. Second, the chart contains gross numbers (nominal revenue) and not inflation adjusted numbers (real revenue). etc.


Real total federal revenue (in 2005 dollars):

2007 - $2,414.0 billion
2008 - $2,228.1 billion
2009 - $1,899.0 billion
2010 - $1,927.9 billion
2011 - $1,998.7 billion (IOW, real revenue is still off by over 17%)


http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Doc...

Nominal FIT:

2007 - $1,116 billion
2008 - $1,032 billion
2009 - $ 866 billion

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-indi... See Table 4

Adjust for inflation, and the decline would be even bigger.

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
What deceptive commentary.

From fleg? I'm shocked, SHOCKED to hear that!

First, the chart attached to the linked article is for total federal revenue, not federal income tax revenue. Second, the chart contains gross numbers (nominal revenue) and not inflation adjusted numbers (real revenue). etc.

Math has a Liberal Bias. First the polls, now this.

-synchronicity
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.

Resize welfare first.

Like it or not, believe it or not, the USA is in a chronic state of war with radical islam/terrorist/what ever euphemism. Thus we need to constantly update/maintain our military superiority. Then throw in the growing Chinese presence....

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Adjust for inflation, and the decline would be even bigger.

Not that big of a difference.

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical...

According to this table, inflation was about 2% over that period. And interesting enough, was -0.34 for 2009.

The bottom line, we have more of a spending problem than a revenue problem.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.

Resize welfare first.

Like it or not, believe it or not, the USA is in a chronic state of war with radical islam/terrorist/what ever euphemism. Thus we need to constantly update/maintain our military superiority. Then throw in the growing Chinese presence....

JLC
________________

You must be arguing with one of the sillier lib, but he does have a point

the only battle worth fighting is the one with the rich, the only enemy Obama and his boot lickers will acknowledge.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
JLC:

<<<Adjust for inflation, and the decline would be even bigger.>>>

"Not that big of a difference.

http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical...... "


Nominal FIT:

2007 - $1,116 billion
2008 - $1,032 billion
2009 - $ 866 billion

Per earlier post.

In 2007 Dollars - http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

2007 - $1,116 billion
2008 - $ 994 billion (rounded up)
2009 - $ 837 billion (rounded up)

Bigger decline, as a I noted, and you can determine how much bigger, given that I was simply noting the trend line and not the degree or amount.

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
JLC:

<<<resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.>>>

"Resize welfare first.

Like it or not, believe it or not, the USA is in a chronic state of war with radical islam/terrorist/what ever euphemism. Thus we need to constantly update/maintain our military superiority. Then throw in the growing Chinese presence...."


The US spends roughly 41% (40.98) of world-wide defense expenditures,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_e...

and more than the than the next 9 countries with high military spending, by a margin of 1.23:1, [Id.] and

and more in total than the next 14 countries with high military expenditures. [Id.]

See also, e.g., http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/16/the-military-imbalance-how...

Given the existing disparities in spending, is there ever an amount of US defense spending that you would consider too much, or is the desire for military spending simply non-satiable?

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Given the existing disparities in spending, is there ever an amount of US defense spending that you would consider too much, or is the desire for military spending simply non-satiable?

What ever it takes to keep us the Super Power. Obviously we are at a tactical disadvantage. The radical islam terrorist only has to be right/lucky once. The military has to be right every single day.

There are some fronts about military spending I'm willing to concede. Why the heck are will still in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc. There are plenty of bases we can close. If we maintain a naval and air superiority (including NASA), we can put our boots anywhere and quickly enough.

My primary concern is radical islam/terrorist. However, China is a growing threat. An excellent book, In Search of Modern China (now in 3rd edition) has a section about China's growing military power and how they are currently using it to strengthen their influence.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
JLC:


<<<resize the military budget first, then the others. but the sacred cow needs dehorning.>>>

"Resize welfare first."

Why?

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258

For all federal spending:

Defense + - 20%

Social Security - 20% - but not paid for with federal income tax, paid by FICA tax.

Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP - 21% - Medicare not paid for with federal income tax, paid for by FICA; Medicare is 2/3 of this total, so 7% for for Medicaid and CHIPS is welfare.

Safety Net Programs - 13% "Such programs keep millions of people out of poverty each year. A Center analysis shows that government safety net programs kept some 25 million people out of poverty in 2010. Without any government income assistance, either from safety net programs or other income supports like Social Security, the poverty rate would have been nearly double in 2010 (28.6 rather than 15.5 percent)."

Interest on Debt - 6%

Benefits for Fedreral REtirees and Veterans - 7% - Not sure why benefits for veterans is allocated here instead of Defense. Makes we wonder where salary to miliary is allocated?

Everything else, is 4% or less by category and 11% of all federal expenditures in total.

The two large "targets" to reduce deficit versus FIT collections are defense and welfare. No sure why welfare should come first when we outspend the remainder of the world in military spending, and likely underspend compared to most of the world in welfare.

Regards, JAFO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/defense-entitlement-sp...

Medicare and Other Entitlements Are Crowding Out Spending on Defense

Ever-increasing entitlement spending is putting pressure on key spending priorities, such as national defense, a core constitutional function of government. Defense spending has declined significantly over time, even when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are included, as spending on the three major entitlements—Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—has more than tripled.
----------------------------------------------------
With that said i'd cut military spending too but i sure as hell wouldn't put it first so the dems can pull the ole Lucy with the football trick. I wouldn't fall for Obama's ridiculous, "Hey, let's raise taxes on the rich first and then discuss entitlement reform in good faith, everything on the table, you bunch of hostage takers!". You'd have to be a complete jackwagon to fall for that one.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Medicare and Other Entitlements Are Crowding Out Spending on Defense

Ever-increasing entitlement spending is putting pressure on key spending priorities, such as national defense, a core constitutional function of government. Defense spending has declined significantly over time, even when the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are included, as spending on the three major entitlements—Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—has more than tripled.
----------------------------------------------------
With that said i'd cut military spending too but i sure as hell wouldn't put it first so the dems can pull the ole Lucy with the football trick. I wouldn't fall for Obama's ridiculous, "Hey, let's raise taxes on the rich first and then discuss entitlement reform in good faith, everything on the table, you bunch of hostage takers!". You'd have to be a complete jackwagon to fall for that one.
-----------------------------------------------------
Wilbur Ross backs me up!

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49839557

President Obama's proposal to extend the middle-class tax cuts before reforming the tax code and entitlements is a "sucker's game," billionaire investor Wilbur Ross told CNBC Thursday.

"The trade-off the president proposed is not a trade-off," Ross said on “Squawk Box”. "To say give me what I want, which is the middle-class relief, and I'll give you a framework for negotiations, that's a sucker's game.”

In a press conference on Wednesday, Obama called for an immediate extension of the Bush-era tax cuts on all but the wealthiest Americans to avoid the "fiscal cliff." He added that he'd be willing to negotiate other big issues like tax and entitlement reform at a later date.

Ross said that what’s being obscured in the fiscal cliff debate is not that the country is under taxed, it’s that it is spending too much.

“The whole focus is on revenues,” he noted. “You can't solve the bulk of the problem with revenues. It’s not going to happen.”

Moreover, the debate on spending isn't about actual cuts but about reducing the rate of spending growth, Ross added.
-----------------------------------------------
Exactly.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"Resize welfare first."

Why?


Because there is actually a Constitutional justification for defense spending.

Unlike welfare.

Which I note you conveniently chop into three categories in order to create the illusion that it's not significantly larger than defense spending.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No sure why welfare should come first when we outspend the remainder of the world in military spending, and likely underspend compared to most of the world in welfare.

IMHO, welfare has become a hammock instead of a safety net for many. You've seen enough of my posts describing my work days to know I see it every freaking day.

Also, look at the countries with welfare system of any significance. They are in economic trouble. Many more would be if they had to spend for their own defense instead of relying on the USA to take care of them.

Face it, I'm more Spartan and you're more Athenian. I'll fight the Battle of Thermopylae and you can debate the arts.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Face it, I'm more Spartan and you're more Athenian. I'll fight the Battle of Thermopylae and you can debate the arts. JLC

Doc how did that battle turn out?


mcb
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Face it, I'm more Spartan and you're more Athenian. I'll fight the Battle of Thermopylae and you can debate the arts. JLC

Doc how did that battle turn out?


mcb


The 300 became immortalized while the art teacher was forgotten.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
The 300 became immortalized while the art teacher was forgotten.
JLC

Leonidas was killed. Xerxes cut off his head, crucified his body, placed it for public display, and allowed it to rot in the sun. The Persian army went on to burn every Boeotian city to the ground before occupying Athens.

The art teacher went on to become a leader in the socialist progressive left and paved the way for the current Greek economic collapse.

mcb
Print the post Back To Top