Fiscal 2020 First Quarter Budget Deficit Up 25%

Politics and religion: two polarizing topics that deserve their own little place
tmcats
Posts: 7604
Joined: September 3rd, 2013, 1:09 pm
Has liked: 1020 times
Been liked: 714 times

Pick 'Em

Re: Fiscal 2020 First Quarter Budget Deficit Up 25%

Post by tmcats » February 18th, 2020, 1:40 pm

ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 1:35 pm
Revenue Growth in 2015 was 7.6%
Revenue growth in 2018 was .3%
Revenue Growth in 2019 was 3.9%
The difference? Tax cuts that went to stock buybacks.
2016 revenue growth 0.6%
2017 revenue growth 1.5%

so, due to djt tax cuts, revenue growth between 2016 (obama's last budget) and 2019 was what?
"There ain't anybody stoppin' our ass!" CK

ChemicalKat
Posts: 4517
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 36 times

Post by ChemicalKat » February 18th, 2020, 1:58 pm

tmcats wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 1:40 pm
ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 1:35 pm
Revenue Growth in 2015 was 7.6%
Revenue growth in 2018 was .3%
Revenue Growth in 2019 was 3.9%
The difference? Tax cuts that went to stock buybacks.
2016 revenue growth 0.6%
2017 revenue growth 1.5%

so, due to djt tax cuts, revenue growth between 2016 (obama's last budget) and 2019 was what?
A fraction of the growth rate between 2009-2016. Due. To. Tax. Cuts.

tmcats
Posts: 7604
Joined: September 3rd, 2013, 1:09 pm
Has liked: 1020 times
Been liked: 714 times

Pick 'Em

Post by tmcats » February 18th, 2020, 2:11 pm

i'm pleased you've moved from lost revenue to fractional growth. by the way, the difference between obama's last revenue growth rate of 0.6% and djt's after-tax-cut rate of 3.9% is +550% increase in revenue growth. see how those percentage things work both ways?
"There ain't anybody stoppin' our ass!" CK

ChemicalKat
Posts: 4517
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 36 times

Post by ChemicalKat » February 18th, 2020, 2:44 pm

tmcats wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:11 pm
i'm pleased you've moved from lost revenue to fractional growth. by the way, the difference between obama's last revenue growth rate of 0.6% and djt's after-tax-cut rate of 3.9% is +550% increase in revenue growth. see how those percentage things work both ways?
Jesus Christ you don’t know how growth rates work. This is so freaking insane.

Go back to your graph. Which time period is flatter, 2016-2020 or 2009-2016?

Also, economic growth of 2-3% was going to happen regardless of whether the tax cuts passed or not. It’s been happening for the last 10 years. Which number is bigger, 1,000 x (1+3%) x 21%? Or 1,000 x (1+3%) x 33%? The difference between the two is LOSS OF REVENUE.

Why do I have to explain this?

KITNooga
Posts: 5709
Joined: September 19th, 2017, 8:22 am
Has liked: 351 times
Been liked: 292 times

Post by KITNooga » February 18th, 2020, 2:54 pm

ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:44 pm
tmcats wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:11 pm
i'm pleased you've moved from lost revenue to fractional growth. by the way, the difference between obama's last revenue growth rate of 0.6% and djt's after-tax-cut rate of 3.9% is +550% increase in revenue growth. see how those percentage things work both ways?
Jesus Christ you don’t know how growth rates work. This is so freaking insane.

Go back to your graph. Which time period is flatter, 2016-2020 or 2009-2016?

Also, economic growth of 2-3% was going to happen regardless of whether the tax cuts passed or not. It’s been happening for the last 10 years. Which number is bigger, 1,000 x (1+3%) x 21%? Or 1,000 x (1+3%) x 33%? The difference between the two is LOSS OF REVENUE.

Why do I have to explain this?
and yet REVENUES keep going up? looks like the standard govt approach: where growth less than desired is called a cut.

revenues are up. yes/no?
earned income is up. yes/no?

consumer confidence and spending is up. yes.no?

Image

and to show you I'm fair and even, a recent micro view, but an incomplete view
Image

ChemicalKat
Posts: 4517
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 36 times

Post by ChemicalKat » February 18th, 2020, 2:57 pm

Let me walk back the language on my last post. I initially read “550% growth of revenue” instead of “550% increase in revenue growth”. The latter is technically correct language but is still a meaningless statistic. Still, I was a bit harsh and unfair.

ChemicalKat
Posts: 4517
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 36 times

Post by ChemicalKat » February 18th, 2020, 3:01 pm

KITNooga wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:54 pm
ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:44 pm


Jesus Christ you don’t know how growth rates work. This is so freaking insane.

Go back to your graph. Which time period is flatter, 2016-2020 or 2009-2016?

Also, economic growth of 2-3% was going to happen regardless of whether the tax cuts passed or not. It’s been happening for the last 10 years. Which number is bigger, 1,000 x (1+3%) x 21%? Or 1,000 x (1+3%) x 33%? The difference between the two is LOSS OF REVENUE.

Why do I have to explain this?
and yet REVENUES keep going up? looks like the standard govt approach: where growth less than desired is called a cut.

revenues are up. yes/no?
earned income is up. yes/no?

consumer confidence and spending is up. yes.no?

Image

and to show you I'm fair and even, a recent micro view, but an incomplete view
Image
1. Yes but not as much as it could have been.
2. Yes as it has been for the last 10 years.
3. Yes and I believe yes. As it has been for the last 10 years.

Are you all of the opinion that the economy can suddenly jump from “bad” to “good” rather than gradually shift like it actually does?

tmcats
Posts: 7604
Joined: September 3rd, 2013, 1:09 pm
Has liked: 1020 times
Been liked: 714 times

Pick 'Em

Post by tmcats » February 18th, 2020, 3:28 pm

ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:57 pm
Let me walk back the language on my last post. I initially read “550% growth of revenue” instead of “550% increase in revenue growth”. The latter is technically correct language but is still a meaningless statistic. Still, I was a bit harsh and unfair.
i'm not sure why you'd walk it back. you state all sorts of factless, feckless, outrageous defenses for liberal policy. why walk this one back when there are so many more?
"There ain't anybody stoppin' our ass!" CK

KITNooga
Posts: 5709
Joined: September 19th, 2017, 8:22 am
Has liked: 351 times
Been liked: 292 times

Post by KITNooga » February 18th, 2020, 3:45 pm

am often curious CK, how well we would REALLY be doing if all the news from the mainstream media were NOT all gloom, doom and negative.

I do not wonder, however, if those same media outlets would be cheerleading if only it were a Dem in office.


that's pretty darned obvious.

ChemicalKat
Posts: 4517
Joined: September 11th, 2017, 9:18 am
Has liked: 2 times
Been liked: 36 times

Post by ChemicalKat » February 18th, 2020, 3:45 pm

tmcats wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 3:28 pm
ChemicalKat wrote:
February 18th, 2020, 2:57 pm
Let me walk back the language on my last post. I initially read “550% growth of revenue” instead of “550% increase in revenue growth”. The latter is technically correct language but is still a meaningless statistic. Still, I was a bit harsh and unfair.
i'm not sure why you'd walk it back. you state all sorts of factless, feckless, outrageous defenses for liberal policy. why walk this one back when there are so many more?
That’s literally basic math. You don’t get to have your own version of math because it would mean you have to admit that you’re wrong.

Post Reply