The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

/----/ After Obozo decimated the military, Trump has to rebuild it. Same thing happened to Reagan and GWB.

What bullshit. The military has not been decimated by any means. We spend more money than the next ten countries combined and we wouldn't have to if we weren't sticking our nose in everybody else's business.

/----/ I'll take The Hill's word over yours anyday: Congressional leaders are also preparing the FY2018 national defense budget, which must not only reverse sequestration’s crippling cuts but also lift defense spending substantially above the President’s budget request in order to begin rebuilding the military in earnest.
U.S. military readiness crisis: A call to action for Congress

Pentagon buries evidence of $125 billion in bureaucratic waste

 

[edthecynic]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

 

[Cellblock2429]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

 

[CowboyTed]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

/----/ After Obozo decimated the military, Trump has to rebuild it. Same thing happened to Reagan and GWB.

What a ridiculous lie.

/----/ Prove it's a lie. Prove the military wasn't cut over the last 8 years. Go ahead, Tinkerbell.
Democratic Views on Defense Spending | Republican Views

But this increase in deficit is not as a result of Increased Military spending... Read it, it is the tax cuts... CBO was very plain in saying that...

So you infrastructure spending, military spending , opiate treatment funding went to Rich and Corporations....

 

[Timmy]

If you want to “rebuild “ the military , pass a war tax . We are still at war you know .

You can bitch about obama all you like. Fact is the Perez and congress are gop . And they are the fiscally responsible party . So they say .

Well then be fiscally responsible ! What better time to act on debt than when the economy is good .

 

[AntonToo]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

/----/ After Obozo decimated the military, Trump has to rebuild it. Same thing happened to Reagan and GWB.

How the fuck do you reach into you asshole and pull this kind of bullshit out with a straight face?

IT SAYS RIGHT THERE IN THE ARTICLE WHY DEFICITS ARE EXPECTED TO BE UP:

In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.


Yes - when corporations and people pay less taxes government collects less and this effect is especially prominent in the first year, especially with front loaded tax-cuts.

 

[Desperado]

Why dowa the US borrow money just togive it away?
Instead of borrowing money the US should just cut spending

 

[NYcarbineer]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Revenue also increased after the Clinton tax increase in 1993 so what's your point? Reagan also signed a huge tax increase in 1982.

 

[Dragonlady]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

/----/ After Obozo decimated the military, Trump has to rebuild it. Same thing happened to Reagan and GWB.

This is why the debt has jumped?? But..we have done nothing yet to rebuild..that is still in the future!

Blaming this on your favorite whipping boy is not going to work here. BTW...Obama did not 'Decimate' the military. His administration did spend less..they also did less. There was a draw-down from post-9/11 levels--not quite the same thing at all.

You just wish to ignore that reduced revenues are going to result in even more borrowing....and the result may well be a recession.

/----/ And we haven't borrowed the money either. Re-read the headline: "set to" and "on track" doesn't mean we have. Now if the plans to rebuild the military go through then we will be borrowing money.
"The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year "

Wrong idiot! The CBO is working with ACTUAL figures, not hypotheticals. As things stand, if there are no additional expenditures and based on the funding levels and contractual obligations now in place, the debt will increase by $1 trillion.

Any additional funds for a military buildup, infrastructure improvements, or the Wall, will only increase the amount of the borrowing.

Donald Trump is running the country like he runs his businesses, into bankruptcy.

 

[Dragonlady]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

Still much lower that 2009 - 2012 when we had a community organizer as president, and for all that it did squat for the economy.

Wrong again, idiot. This is the level of unfunded spending that Republicans said would destroy the US economy under Obama in an economic freefall.

The instability the tax cut is creating is already affecting the stock market. People are selling off and getting out before the coming crash.

Putin is laughing manically at the mess Trump is inflicting on your government.

 

[Faun]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

But the memo!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is all that matters....

/----/ You Libtards keep downplaying the memo, but time will tell.

”Time will tell??”

The memo was supposed to tell.

 

[Faun]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Yeah, after Reagan increased taxes.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Revenue also increased after the Clinton tax increase in 1993 so what's your point? Reagan also signed a huge tax increase in 1982.

This is the part of the story they always ignore. Revenue goes up every year unless we are in recession due to an increase in the number of people paying taxes. somewhere in this thread is a chart they claim shows correlation between tax cuts and revenue increases when the chart shows just the opposite, but they are not smart enough to know how to read a chart

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

But the memo!!!!!!!!!!!!! That is all that matters....

/----/ You Libtards keep downplaying the memo, but time will tell.

”Time will tell??”

The memo was supposed to tell.

and now it is the next memo that will tell...then the one after that...and the one after that.

 

[Cellblock2429]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Yeah, after Reagan increased taxes.

/---/ Get a clue will ya?
President Reagan raised taxes eleven times over the course of his presidency, all in the name of fiscal responsibility, but the overall tax burden went down during his presidency.
Reaganomics - Wikipedia

 

[NYcarbineer]

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Revenue also increased after the Clinton tax increase in 1993 so what's your point? Reagan also signed a huge tax increase in 1982.

This is the part of the story they always ignore. Revenue goes up every year unless we are in recession due to an increase in the number of people paying taxes. somewhere in this thread is a chart they claim shows correlation between tax cuts and revenue increases when the chart shows just the opposite, but they are not smart enough to know how to read a chart

The myth that cutting taxes increases revenues is simply irresistible to so many people because it's is a no-sacrifice 'solution' to the debt problem - it's the equivalent of an 'eat anything you want and still lose weight' fad diet.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Yeah, after Reagan increased taxes.

/---/ Get a clue will ya?
President Reagan raised taxes eleven times over the course of his presidency, all in the name of fiscal responsibility, but the overall tax burden went down during his presidency.
Reaganomics - Wikipedia

Reagan never came close to fiscal responsibility.

 

[Cellblock2429]

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Yeah, after Reagan increased taxes.

/---/ Get a clue will ya?
President Reagan raised taxes eleven times over the course of his presidency, all in the name of fiscal responsibility, but the overall tax burden went down during his presidency.
Reaganomics - Wikipedia

Reagan never came close to fiscal responsibility.

/-----/ President Reagan couldn't spend one dime without the approval of the democRAT congress led by the drunken sot Tip O'neill. So what are you yammering about?

 

[Skylar]

Analysis | The U.S. government is set to borrow nearly $1 trillion this year, an 84 percent jump from last year

Recession in 2019? It only makes sense that the man who made his fortune with other people's money is still all about borrowing:

"It was another crazy news week, so it's understandable if you missed a small but important announcement from the Treasury Department: The federal government is on track to borrow nearly $1 trillion this fiscal year — Trump's first full year in charge of the budget.

That's almost double what the government borrowed in fiscal year 2017.

Here are the exact figures: The U.S. Treasury expects to borrow $955 billion this fiscal year, according to a documents released Wednesday. It's the highest amount of borrowing in six years, and a big jump from the $519 billion the federal government borrowed last year.


Treasury mainly attributed the increase to the “fiscal outlook.” The Congressional Budget Office was more blunt. In a report this week, the CBO said tax receipts are going to be lower because of the new tax law.
The uptick in borrowing is yet another complication in the heated debates in Congress over whether to spend more money on infrastructure, the military, disaster relief and other domestic programs. The deficit is already up significantly, even before Congress allots more money to any of these areas.

“We're addicted to debt,” says Marc Goldwein, senior policy director at Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. He blames both parties for the situation.

What's particularly jarring is this is the first time borrowing has jumped this much (as a share of GDP) in a non-recession time since Ronald Reagan was president, says Ernie Tedeschi, a former senior adviser to the U.S. Treasury who is now head of fiscal analysis at Evercore ISI. Under Reagan, borrowing spiked because of a buildup in the military, something Trump is advocating again."

But the tax cut as supposed to pay for itself. More than pay for itself.

The GOP.....they weren't bullshitting us, were they?

 

[edthecynic]

"In 1980, the last year before the tax cuts, tax revenues were $956 billion (in constant 1996 dollars).

Revenues exceeded that 1980 level in eight of the next 10 years. Annual revenues over the next decade averaged $102 billion above their 1980 level (in constant 1996 dollars).

Notice the gymnastics the Right has to do to get the loss in revenue from St Ronnie's tax cuts to look better. 1981 was actually the last year of revenue before the Reagan tax cuts, which were retroactive to July, so if you take the 1981 revenue and add back the retroactive tax cut you will have the actual revenue for 1981 before tax cuts and that would be the real base of $1,054.8 billion from which to calculate the lost revenue from Reagan's tax cuts. With those real numbers it took 6 years to finally increase before tax cut revenue.

The chart from your link:

/----/ Say what?

Ahhh yes, the right-wing perpetual dumb act.
The first half of 1981 was taxed at pre Reagan cuts rate, had the whole year been taxed the same the revenue would have been $1,054.8 billion therefore the real pre Reagan tax cut base is $1,054.8 and not $956.0 billion.
I know it involves math, but do you get it now?

/---- Revenue increased starting in 1984 and through 1990. So what's your point Spanky?

Revenue did not surpass the baseline until 1987.