The coming Budget Battle

  
By:  Vic Eldred  •  2 months ago  •  62 comments


The coming Budget Battle
 

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People

Today President Trump will unveil his fiscal year 2021 budget.

This budget will set the President's spending priorities:

Total Budget: $4.8 Trillion

$740.5 Billion in Defense Spending
$590    Billion in Domestic Spending

$2 Billion in new border wall construction

$1.4 Trillion for an extension of the Trump tax cuts over a 10-year period 

A 21% cut to the State Department and foreign aid spending

In addition the President is looking to tackle one of former Speaker Paul Ryan's complaints -  ENTITLEMENT SPENDING:
"non-defense discretionary programs" (a $2 Trillion cut over the next decade) and certain costly "mandatory programs" (another $2 Trillion cut over the next decade).
$130 billion savings from Medicare
$292 billion savings from food stamp and Medicaid programs by enacting new work requirements for beneficiaries
$70 billion savings via a clamp-down on eligibility for federal disability benefits.



Democrats are not expected to take kindly to the proposals (many have expressed their displeasure) and will have their own counter plan.

Key administration officials will be explaining the details for much of the week.


Meanwhile in the US Senate, 5  more Judicial nominations will proceed to a vote.


Article is Locked by Moderator


 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Vic Eldred
1  author  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

There is always a price to pay to get the job done.


Rules of civility apply

 
 
 
MUVA
1.1  MUVA  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    2 months ago

The democrats answer raise taxes. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MUVA @1.1    2 months ago

Raise taxes and propose a bigger budget with more pork & sugar cookies!

 
 
 
lady in black
1.1.2  lady in black  replied to  MUVA @1.1    2 months ago

And the republican answer is to keep giving tax breaks to the rich and fucking over the middle class and the poor...same ole, same ole

And don't forget trying to mess with Social Security (they'd love for their 1%ers to get their hands on that piggy bank) and medicare.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @1.1.2    2 months ago
don't forget trying to mess with Social Security

Where did you see that in this budget proposal?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
1.1.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    2 months ago
Where did you see that in this budget proposal?

I think this may answer the question..........................

384

384

"He's gong to." The go to for the "clairvoyants" 

jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @1.1.4    2 months ago
i have NO PROBLEM with work requirements

They've had a tough week and they deserve every bit of it!

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump Fan #1
1.1.6  Donald J. Trump Fan #1  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    2 months ago

She didn’t because it’s not there.  Simply TDS at work.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Donald J. Trump Fan #1 @1.1.6    2 months ago

The dems are in trouble.

EObgMFnWsAE3wiJ?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
Texan1211
1.1.8  Texan1211  replied to  lady in black @1.1.2    2 months ago

Please do tell us how only the rich got a tax break, and how the middle class and poor got fucked over.

 
 
 
WallyW
1.1.9  WallyW  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.7    2 months ago
 
 
 
MUVA
1.1.10  MUVA  replied to  lady in black @1.1.2    2 months ago

I’m middle class blue collar and enjoy the tax cut I revived both personal and corporate.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.11  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  WallyW @1.1.9    2 months ago

Did a voter who ask how he can be expected to win a national election after placing fourth in Iowa?

That would make her a "lying dog-faced pony soldier."

 
 
 
WallyW
1.1.12  WallyW  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.11    2 months ago

Apparently. Dems seem to be hard at work creating campaign TV sound bite ads for the Republicans.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  WallyW @1.1.12    2 months ago

The best maybe Pelosi sitting as some very impressive Americans were introduced from the gallery or her tearing up the Presidents speech alongside photo's of them. I think contrasting all the things the President has been doing against the House efforts to remove him would also be striking, but it's not my job.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
1.1.14  KDMichigan  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.13    2 months ago
The best maybe Pelosi sitting as some very impressive Americans were introduced from the gallery

They could run on their treatment of women, They tell the females in congress what to wear to the SOTU, when to stand, when to clap...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.1.15  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  KDMichigan @1.1.14    2 months ago
They tell the females in congress what to wear to the SOTU, when to stand, when to clap...

Because they are dealing with weak women, which happens to be tomorrow's topic.
Fortunately, we have some strong women on the GOP side:

"Leftists went hard after Rep. Elise Stefanik after she refused to be silenced by Rep. Adam Schiff during the House impeachment inquiry.

Several Democrats and their media and celebrity allies vowed to ensure Stefanik would lose her seat this November by urging people to donate to her opponent’s campaign.

It now looks like Stefanik is having the last laugh.

The New York Republican raised $3.2 million in campaign contributions over the last quarter of 2019, more than Schiff and socialist Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez."

https://www.worldtribune.com/rep-stefanik-a-favorite-target-of-leftist-haters-outraises-both-schiff-and-aoc/


This is what a strong woman looks like:

stefanikspan.jpg

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
2  igknorantzrulz    2 months ago

wasn't Trumpp to have wiped out our Federal Deficit by now...

instead of adding an extra Trill, or has Trump confused me yet again ?

Tax cuts benefitting corporations who were already doing fine, as he wants to cut food stamps, medicaid, and medicare.

i have NO PROBLEM with work requirements, but bleeding the poor while enriching, yet again, the richest, has only further eroded Americas' middle class and is just stupid.

what is it, 400 + individuals posses as much wealth as the remaining US populace ?

as we can afford 740 + Billion to police the world....yea, sounds reasonable, if

your a defense contractor, are a shareholder in some thieving big corp., or, are just happy seeing so  much , go to so few, at the top .

trickle down your leg economics does not work, no matter how many times the gop lies to you about it, but you nguys should be used to that by now.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2    2 months ago
wasn't Trumpp to have wiped out our Federal Deficit by now...

Trump is a fiscal Conservative?  Since when?


i have NO PROBLEM with work requirements

Nice to hear

 
 
 
loki12
2.2  loki12  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2    2 months ago

Who controls the purse strings? Congress or the President?

 
 
 
WallyW
2.3  WallyW  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2    2 months ago
Tax cuts benefitting corporations who were already doing fine, as he wants to cut food stamps, medicaid, and medicare.

A long standing left wing lie

 
 
 
WallyW
2.4  WallyW  replied to  igknorantzrulz @2    2 months ago
what is it, 400 + individuals posses as much wealth as the remaining US populace ?

And you expect these 400 to make up the difference?  jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3  r.t..b...    2 months ago

from the seed...$740.5 Billion in Defense Spending
                       $590.0 Billion in Domestic Spending

A good start would be to reverse these two, with oversight to confirm how these billions (with a B) are spent. And not to diminish the necessity of allocating dollars for our common defense, but let us allocate those dollars in line with the present day threats...we don't need aircraft carriers as much as we need cyber-security. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @3    2 months ago
A good start would be to reverse these two

Back to Obama?  I'm sure the dems will d just that!

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.2  Split Personality  replied to  r.t..b... @3    2 months ago

I see no seed or any source for the proposed information.

The Budget is expected to be released later today.

 
 
 
Ender
3.2.1  Ender  replied to  Split Personality @3.2    2 months ago

I have seen several reports about it.

Supposedly there is also something like a 23% cut to the EPA.

I guess we will see all the details soon enough.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.2.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Split Personality @3.2    2 months ago
I see no seed or any source for the proposed information.

Fair enough...perhaps the caveat should have been more appropriately addressed to the seeder. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.2.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @3.2.2    2 months ago
perhaps the caveat should have been more appropriately addressed to the seeder. 

Don't be shy.  

https://news.yahoo.com/president-donald-trumps-budget-reflects-142235503.html

Delivered right to your doorstep!


 
 
 
Split Personality
3.2.4  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.2.3    2 months ago

Then maybe you can correct your "article" to read $2 Billion in new wall construction, not $2 million...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.2.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @3.2.4    2 months ago

Thanks for the heads up. It's an honor to have such attention devoted to every detail on all of my articles & seeds.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4  r.t..b...    2 months ago

also from the seed...$1.4 Trillion for an extension of the Trump tax cuts over a 10-year period 

....Trillion (with a T)...and therein lies the crux of the 2020 election. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @4    2 months ago
and therein lies the crux of the 2020 election.

Really?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.1.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1    2 months ago
Really?

Yup...If it truly is 'the economy, stupid'...a 1.4 trillion budget line expenditure for tax cuts will be a main point of debate. Where does that $1,400,000,000,000 go and to whose ultimate benefit?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.1    2 months ago
Where does that $1,400,000,000,000 go and to whose ultimate benefit?

It goes to benefiting consumers and the economy and maybe even the budget. That tax cut could fuel just enough economic prosperity to increase growth/jobs/wages which means additional revenue. A $1 Trillion Cut could come back as a multi-Trillion revenue increase!

 
 
 
lady in black
4.1.3  lady in black  replied to  r.t..b... @4.1.1    2 months ago

It will only benefit the 1%ers, the rest of us we get screwed as usual

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.4  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.2    2 months ago

Yet that has still failed to ever come to fruition.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
4.1.5  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.2    2 months ago
could

Not just one, but two coulds in your trickle-down hypothesis. How much evidence does one need to see tax cuts do not trickle-down but rather settle in the brackish brackets where they are aimed.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.4    2 months ago
Yet that has still failed to ever come to fruition.

Evidently, It's time for another dose of revisionist history?

Economists have known of the relation between taxes and the economy since the days of Adam Smith who wrote:

"High taxes, sometimes by diminishing the consumption of the taxed commodities, and sometimes by encouraging smuggling, frequently afford a smaller revenue to government than what might be drawn from more moderate taxes."

https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/smith-adam/works/wealth-of-nations/book05/ch02b-4.htm


And in case you missed it, way back in 1974 a renowned economist famously laid it all out on a napkin for a President who used it to fuel a 20 year boom.


 
 
 
Ender
4.1.7  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.6    2 months ago

So now you are going to switch from people/corporations paying federal taxes to taxes on consumer goods.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.7    2 months ago

Are you talking about tax cuts or tariffs?

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.9  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.8    2 months ago

Tax cuts....

Also, I cannot see a twenty year boom starting in 1974. Especially looking at overall GDP.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.9    2 months ago

So how does that transfer taxes from individuals to goods?

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.11  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.10    2 months ago

What does that have to do with the government making tax cuts and taking in less revenue and the claim that the economy will have enough of a boom to cover said losses? Which never happens...

 
 
 
WallyW
4.1.12  WallyW  replied to  Ender @4.1.11    2 months ago

Cutting tax rates results in more revenue

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.11    2 months ago
What does that have to do with the government making tax cuts and taking in less revenue

You just said in Post # 4.1.7 that somebody was switching taxes on individuals to goods!  I'm still trying to figure out what that means?


taking in less revenue and the claim that the economy will have enough of a boom to cover said losses? Which never happens...

IT DID:

The National Bureau of Economic Research in 1999 declared the period from 1982-1999 one continuous mega economic expansion, the longest sustained period of prosperity in the 20th century."

figure9.jpg


 
 
 
Ender
4.1.14  Ender  replied to  WallyW @4.1.12    2 months ago

Uh huh. Most of the tax burden falls on the middle class. It all fell short of the predictions.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.15  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.14    2 months ago
Most of the tax burden falls on the middle class.

Are you saying the middle class had a tax increase?  What burden?

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.16  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.13    2 months ago

512

Link

512

Link

There has been highs and lows yet no matter how one cuts it, tax cuts have not led to any substantial growth.

In fact, there was a round of tax hikes in 83 and the next year saw a boom.

1981 $3.207 $6.931 2.5% Reagan tax cuts
1982 $3.344 $6.806 -1.8% Recession ended
1983 $3.634 $7.118 4.6% Tax hike and defense spending 
1984 $4.038 $7.633 7.2%  
1985 $4.339 $7.951 4.2%  
1986 $4.580 $8.226 3.5% Tax cut
1987 $4.855 $8.511 3.5% Black Monday
1988 $5.236 $8.867 4.2% Fed raised rates
1989 $5.642 $9.192 3.7% S&L Crisis
1990 $5.963 $9.366 1.9% Recession

Link

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.17  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.15    2 months ago

What burden? Individual income taxes pay most of the federal revenue.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.18  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.17    2 months ago
Individual income taxes pay most of the federal revenue.

What's that a general statement?  So why shouldn't they get a tax cut?

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.19  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @4.1.14    2 months ago
Most of the tax burden falls on the middle class.

Where do you get this nonsense?

The upper 10% pay about 70% of the income taxes in this country. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
4.1.20  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @4.1.16    2 months ago
In fact, there was a round of tax hikes in 83

Yes, there was a big Defense buildup at that time. Something Republicans always have to deal with when they replace democrats. That was a big part of the reason for that particular hike. Nice GDP graphs though.

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.21  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.19    2 months ago

I don't know where you get that either.

In 2016, 140.9 million taxpayers reported earning $10.2 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.4 trillion in individual income taxes.
The share of reported income earned by the top 1 percent of taxpayers fell slightly to 19.7 percent in 2016. Their share of federal individual income taxes fell slightly, to 37.3 percent.
In 2016, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of all individual income taxes, while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 3 percent.
The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).
Link

The top 50 percent paid 97% of all taxes, which in my estimation includes the middle class. Of course the more one makes the more one owes.

You do know that to be the 10 percent the wage is only like 138k. 

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.22  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.20    2 months ago

My point was, a tax hike that year had no detrimental impact on growth.

I can agree about the military to a point. We spend an ever increasing astronomical amount. As much as half the world combined. When China and Russia seem to be able to do it for far less, seems to me to be a lot of wasteful spending there.

I find it funny when republicans say to stop throwing money at things to solve problems, that is exactly what they do with the defence spending.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.23  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @4.1.21    2 months ago

Do you Understand what the term middle class means? Calling the top 50 percent of wage earners ( including the  bezsos  and zuckerbergs of the country)  the middle class is idiotic.

you can’t murder the English language and math enough to justify your spectacularly false claim that most of the tax burden falls on the middle class. It’s a shameless assault on the truth.

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.24  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.23    2 months ago

The one percent pays a lot but not most of taxes.

You had to go to the ten percent to justify your figure. People in the ten percent include people making less than 150k.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.25  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @4.1.24    2 months ago

the one percent pays a lot but not most of the taxes.

Well, that's some strawman, I never claimed the top 1% pay most of the taxes. Remember, you claimed the "middle class"  do.

You had to go to the top 10 percent

No, I went to the top 10 percent to show you how absurd your argument is. The top 3 percent, alone, pay the majority of taxes in this country.  

You cannot defend your claim the majority  of taxes are paid by the middle class. Despite it being as easily disproven as any fact ever has been on this site, you persist in trying to justify it.You simply can't disregard math enough to make it true.

 It's your credibility, if you want to keep ignoring facts, go right ahead.

 
 
 
Ender
4.1.26  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.25    2 months ago

My credibility does not rest on what you think. Far from it.

But I will admit I was wrong on the majority. It is all in how it breaks down and what one considers middle class.

The Tax Foundation’s 50/50 study attributes 97.2% of all 2015 income taxes paid to the top half of individuals. The top 1% of this upper echelon contributed 39% at a 27.1 effective tax rate. This demographic includes those with AGIs of $480,930 or more. Yes, only 1% of all taxpayers earned that much in 2015, but they contributed a smidgen more than 39% to the government’s income that year.
The bottom line: The Pew Research Center study indicates that taxpayers earning from $200,000 to $500,000 annually paid an effective tax rate of   19.4%   in 2015. Their income taxes represented   20.6%   of the total taken in by the IRS. This decreased to   17.9%   of the total at an effective tax rate of   26.8%   for those with incomes over $500,000 and up to $2 million.  Link
 
 
 
WallyW
4.1.27  WallyW  replied to  Ender @4.1.14    2 months ago
Most of the tax burden falls on the middle class.

So, they are the ones who are destined to pay for the free health care, free tuition, etc., that Liz and Bernie tout?

 
 
 
Tacos!
5  Tacos!    2 months ago

It would be great if we could just throw money at everything everyone wanted, but we can't. It seems like it's always hardest to cut spending, but there are many things we managed to do without for a long time. Once the government starts spending on them though, they become "critical" or "indispensable" in the minds of politicians - and maybe in some of their supporters.

The worst part of these annual conversations - to me - is that obviously some thought goes into what to cut, but opposition politicians reflexively attack, declaring you must hate [X] if you want to cut [insert favorite spending item]. The debates need to be more thoughtful than that.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Tacos! @5    2 months ago
The debates need to be more thoughtful than that.

Agreed. I've always been a proponent for the proposal that for every increase in taxes levied, there be an automatic reduction in government spending. Dollar for dollar. Nothing would get the two parties back to negotiating, back to serious debate, and back to accepting compromise than having to justify a new tax and/or budget cut.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6  author  Vic Eldred    2 months ago

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

squiggy
devangelical
Tessylo
jungkonservativ111
Trout Giggles
Kavika
Ronin2
WallyW
loki12
Jasper2529

TOM PA
Freefaller


51 visitors