Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I wont continue to show you every fucking instance where tax breaks put money into the peoples hands...
and the deficit goes down when welfare isn't used for the now employed people.
I have been around when Eisenhower was in office, so know my history.
So what you are saying is that when more people are working, thus paying taxes and not taking out government programs, that the deficit goes up?I wont continue to show you every fucking instance where tax breaks put money into the peoples hands...
Show me where I said that tax breaks don't increase the amount of money people have to spend.
and the deficit goes down when welfare isn't used for the now employed people.
Fact, when the deficit decreases unemployment increases:
I have been around when Eisenhower was in office, so know my history.
Experiencing history isn't the same as knowing history.
Anytime you want to sit at the big boy table and talk like an adult with an adult, please, let me know.
So what you are saying is that when more people are working, thus paying taxes and not taking out government programs, that the deficit goes up?
Yea, tell that to NASA.The government produces NOTHING, only TAKES.. your argument ends there...How does taking 1 trillion dollars from hard working people
How does that answer my question?
Apparently, you didn't understand it, so here, let me try again.
If the government fails to spend $1 trillion dollars, doesn't that reduce GDP by the same amount?
Some of the money spent is offset by taxes, but last year there was $688 billion that was spent in excess of taxes and therefore wasn't taken from taxpayers.
and give it to shitfucks like you , increase employment? Because when your belly starts to grumble, instead of going to Walmart and use yourgvt EBT card, you have to get off your sorry lazy ass, and find a job,
You think you can bait me? Drag me down to your level and beat me with your experience flinging childish insults?
You're going to have to do better than that. How about you stick to the topic and show me how well you understand America's sovereign money system.
you know the one Obama's economic recovery was left for President Trump. Or are you saying that, that is a lie Obama told everyone?
Under the Contract with America that Bill Clinton signed, people were allowed 5 years of welfare before it was terminated. After that they had to seek employment or schooling and be off welfare for 6 months before they went back on. You libfucks touted Bill Clintons economy as great.. Obama stopped that and allowed lazy fucks like you to be welfare queens forever.... You can thank Newt and his republican majority for that contract.
Washingtonpost.com: Clinton Signs Welfare Bill Amid DivisionClinton's endorsement of the bill, which requires recipients to work and limits benefits to five years, fulfills a 1992 campaign promise that came to symbolize his image as a centrist Democrat. But yesterday, as the bill passed its final hurdle, there seemed to be less an atmosphere of celebration than a cloud of controversy hanging over the Rose Garden.
Let's stick to economics, not politics. You get all excited the emotion kicks in and you start ranting irrationally about stuff that you have no clue about.
See, there's a difference between economic accounting and economic political policy. Your problem is, you don't understand the former which leads you to poor conclusions. I suggest you stick to economic accounting and refrain from conflating the two.
As for the national debt, in twenty years, if more people are working and no payments to welfare queens like you, that 1 trillion dollars stolen could pay down the debt. See how easy the math is? Oh yeah, you flunked 2nd grade math, didn't you?
Where do you think money comes from?
So what you are saying is that when more people are working, thus paying taxes and not taking out government programs, that the deficit goes up?
There is a series of cause and effect you don't understand.
When the government increases spending (increased deficit) the unemployment rate falls. This usually happens after a recession. Note in the chart I posted in my last response. This increases income in the private sector. That revinue drives tax receipts up and politicians generally overreact by trying to cut programs and reduce spending which reduces the deficit until the economy falls back into recession, rise and repeat. This can be seen from this chart:
Notice that when the deficit falls below the dotted line, recession sets in and deficits increase.
This can further be shown by looking at the 7 sustained periods when the government ran a surplus. Six out of the last seven times the economy has immediately fallen into a depression immediately following government surplus.
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.
Fact: Recessions tend to come on the heels of reductions in federal debt/money growth (See graph, below), while debt/money growth has increased when recessions were resolving. Taxes reduce debt/money growth. No government can tax itself into prosperity, but many government’s tax themselves into recession.
Your move.
So what you are saying is that when more people are working, thus paying taxes and not taking out government programs, that the deficit goes up?
There is a series of cause and effect you don't understand.
When the government increases spending (increased deficit) the unemployment rate falls. This usually happens after a recession. Note in the chart I posted in my last response. This increases income in the private sector. That revinue drives tax receipts up and politicians generally overreact by trying to cut programs and reduce spending which reduces the deficit until the economy falls back into recession, rise and repeat. This can be seen from this chart:
Notice that when the deficit falls below the dotted line, recession sets in and deficits increase.
This can further be shown by looking at the 7 sustained periods when the government ran a surplus. Six out of the last seven times the economy has immediately fallen into a depression immediately following government surplus.
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.
Fact: Recessions tend to come on the heels of reductions in federal debt/money growth (See graph, below), while debt/money growth has increased when recessions were resolving. Taxes reduce debt/money growth. No government can tax itself into prosperity, but many government’s tax themselves into recession.
Your move.
So what you are saying is that when more people are working, thus paying taxes and not taking out government programs, that the deficit goes up?
There is a series of cause and effect you don't understand.
When the government increases spending (increased deficit) the unemployment rate falls. This usually happens after a recession. Note in the chart I posted in my last response. This increases income in the private sector. That revinue drives tax receipts up and politicians generally overreact by trying to cut programs and reduce spending which reduces the deficit until the economy falls back into recession, rise and repeat. This can be seen from this chart:
Notice that when the deficit falls below the dotted line, recession sets in and deficits increase.
This can further be shown by looking at the 7 sustained periods when the government ran a surplus. Six out of the last seven times the economy has immediately fallen into a depression immediately following government surplus.
1804-1812: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 48%. Depression began 1807.
1817-1821: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 29%. Depression began 1819.
1823-1836: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 99%. Depression began 1837.
1852-1857: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 59%. Depression began 1857.
1867-1873: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 27%. Depression began 1873.
1880-1893: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 57%. Depression began 1893.
1920-1930: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 36%. Depression began 1929.
1997-2001: U. S. Federal Debt reduced 15%. Recession began 2001.
Fact: Recessions tend to come on the heels of reductions in federal debt/money growth (See graph, below), while debt/money growth has increased when recessions were resolving. Taxes reduce debt/money growth. No government can tax itself into prosperity, but many government’s tax themselves into recession.
Your move.
Wow, looks like the last surplus was under Bill Clinton. Then by the end of Bush's second term, disaster. But it looks like things got better once Obama took office.
The OP thinks having a Socialist or Democrat in power will lower the National Debt when everything clearly proves otherwise.
The OP believes the most efficient economy will be realized when government controls all.
So basically, the OP is an imbecile and doesn't know his mouth from his ass.
Need anyone say anything else?
1. PS...ANY surplus under Bill Clinton had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Bill Clinton as anyone with any intelligence knows. But this is how people wanting to destroy America bend the truth and spew propaganda. (The Internet Boon was the source of prosperity...NOT Bill Clinton who JUST HAPPENED to be in office during much of that early on. Honestly, a Chimpanzee could have been President during those years and the economy would have done just as well...actually I'm certain it would have done even better)
2. Oh...and the Left has become masters of creating fake propaganda charts to "prove" their made up points.
Let's call them all "Fake Proof", to go along with their infamous "Fake News", Fake Polls and Fake Investigations of Fake accusations.
In other news....turns out Mueller was most likely involved in the coverup of the Uranium One scandal that is just beginning to rock the news. No wonder he and the Left are so desperate to find "something / anything" to stop D J Trump. So runs the evil, corrupt Left.
