Posted March 8Mar 8 Nothing about how Trump goes about anything - either in business or as president 2017-2020 - suggests that he is some kind of deficit hawk. In fact the opposite is true. If you think the debt will be reduced, I'd really like to hear cogent reasoning as to why. Provide more than feelings - show me how spending cuts coupled with what appears to be a looming recession (maybe we'll pull back - who knows) are going to do it. Explain it in real terms - most of our deficit is owed not to DEI research or policies but to large non-discretionary spending that's pretty much locked in. So, here's your chance Trumpers.
March 8Mar 8 Author To clarify I would say vote "yes" if the debt is merely reduced not in nominal terms but in relation to GDP.
March 9Mar 9 Author Reducing the debt relative to GDP doesn't require budget surpluses, just not deficits large enough to grow the debt faster than the economy. What Musk is doing is introducing more economic pain than whatever pitiful savings come from it. It's causing a recession, though Musk will be fine because he's funneling tax dollars to his companies. Are you all really ok with this? Republicans here are taking a "let him cook" view and he's doing just that: cooking the economy.
March 9Mar 9 8 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: Reducing the debt relative to GDP doesn't require budget surpluses, just not deficits large enough to grow the debt faster than the economy. What Musk is doing is introducing more economic pain than whatever pitiful savings come from it. It's causing a recession, though Musk will be fine because he's funneling tax dollars to his companies. Are you all really ok with this? Republicans here are taking a "let him cook" view and he's doing just that: cooking the economy. I understand the analysis but a positive result being dependent on the tides of the US economy seems too uncertain. For my part, true debt reduction (reducing the overall number) does require many, many, many budget surpluses that can be applied directly to reducing the debt without any smoke and mirrors. Wasteful spending should be stopped. The thing is. not all gov spending is wasteful. There are programs that help people who genuinely need the help. Still, they are finding a lot of ridiculous spending that would've continued otherwise. A scalpel is usually better than a chainsaw, but we'll see how it goes.
March 9Mar 9 Author I would be shocked if the true final number of budget dollars saved was over $50B. And that's not a small number but also nowhere near worth the disruption. Meaningful debt relief will only come in the form of changes to the massive entitlement programs. Raising the age of SS and Medicare eligibility to ensure that the total number of SS recipients relative to the workforce is at a sustainable level would go a long way towards addressing the deficit and thus the debt. They're tinkering at the margins and patting themselves on the back over savings that aren't going to help.
March 9Mar 9 20 hours ago, JohnSnowsHair said: So, here's your chance Trumpers A serious question for unserious people.
March 9Mar 9 Author 1 hour ago, we_gotta_believe said: A serious question for unserious people. There's certainly been a lack of interest in this topic from the usual Trumpy supporting MAGAs. Odd.
March 9Mar 9 In order to reduce the debt Trump will have to raise taxes on the top 1%. He won’t do that. Or else Trump has to shut down most functions of Federal government. He will try, but ultimately I do not think he will succeed enough to reduce the debt.
March 9Mar 9 39 minutes ago, toolg said: In order to reduce the debt Trump will have to raise taxes on the top 1%. He won’t do that. Or else Trump has to shut down most functions of Federal government. He will try, but ultimately I do not think he will succeed enough to reduce the debt. He will have to raise taxes on everyone while slashing spending to make any real headway in the short or medium term. Servicing on the debt is going to be far too high.
March 9Mar 9 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14470559/Trump-pressured-make-Puerto-Rico-independent-save-America-eye-watering-617-billion.html The proposed order appears, the report says, to have been drafted by Congressional offices and third parties seeking secession from the U.S.,
March 10Mar 10 Author Maybe I'll put a second poll up about the deficit. I don't think that's coming down either. Tax receipts are going to be ok for this year but he's crushing the tax base. I predict tax receipts for 2025 will be down from 2024, and I don't think I'm going out on a limb.
March 25Mar 25 Depends.... Speaker Mike Johnson: We do have authority over the federal courts, as you know. We can eliminate an entire district court. We have powered funding over the courts and all these other things. But desperate times call for desperate measures, and Congress is going to act. So stay tuned for that.
April 7Apr 7 12 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: How come there wasn't an "LOL no" option to this poll? @JohnSnowsHair?
April 7Apr 7 Author 39 minutes ago, Phillyterp85 said: How come there wasn't an "LOL no" option to this poll? 26 minutes ago, Alpha_TATEr said: @JohnSnowsHair? I thought about adding options like "LOL no", "is this a serious question?", "of ef'ing course not" but I thought that would just split the vote too much across various "no" options. given the voting I probably should not have been concerned.
April 7Apr 7 On 3/9/2025 at 11:48 AM, JohnSnowsHair said: I would be shocked if the true final number of budget dollars saved was over $50B. And that's not a small number but also nowhere near worth the disruption. Meaningful debt relief will only come in the form of changes to the massive entitlement programs. Raising the age of SS and Medicare eligibility to ensure that the total number of SS recipients relative to the workforce is at a sustainable level would go a long way towards addressing the deficit and thus the debt. They're tinkering at the margins and parting themselves on the back over savings that aren't going to help. I remember seeing a WFA (Waste, Fraud, and Abuse) report like 20 years ago. I can't remember who did it or why. Anyway the essential conclusion was that there is an appreciable and almost predictable level of WFA in the US Federal system, but that it was so small compared to the overall budget that the effort to eliminate it would cost nearly as much (seem familiar?). That's not to say that it should be ignored or tolerated but that a certain level is pretty much expected with a government that size just because people are people. But my sense of it is that if you could wave a wand and eliminate all of it magically you're still in deficit and it just starts creeping back in anyway. A classic fool's errand. I don't have an answer for reducing the debt. I do know that nobody wants to pay more taxes and also nobody wants their favourite thing cut, so good luck. Promises, promises.
April 7Apr 7 Author 55 minutes ago, Arthur Jackson said: I remember seeing a WFA (Waste, Fraud, and Abuse) report like 20 years ago. I can't remember who did it or why. Anyway the essential conclusion was that there is an appreciable and almost predictable level of WFA in the US Federal system, but that it was so small compared to the overall budget that the effort to eliminate it would cost nearly as much (seem familiar?). That's not to say that it should be ignored or tolerated but that a certain level is pretty much expected with a government that size just because people are people. But my sense of it is that if you could wave a wand and eliminate all of it magically you're still in deficit and it just starts creeping back in anyway. A classic fool's errand. I don't have an answer for reducing the debt. I do know that nobody wants to pay more taxes and also nobody wants their favourite thing cut, so good luck. Promises, promises. You're 100% accurate. The only meaningful way to address the deficit is through entitlement reform. And will likely require a tax increase if you're serious about cutting the deficit.
April 7Apr 7 53 minutes ago, Mike030270 said: Did the maga posters not vote or 👀 After seeing your post I've decided to vote Yes. It's a move consistent with the lifetime performance of my investments, which is comparable to that of playing the nickel slots at the Tropicana in AC every day for three decades. I admit I'm also curious if doodoo-face commies with fart breath who have me on block are also blocked from seeing how I vote in polls. Let me know.
Create an account or sign in to comment