US Budget Deficit is Shrinking

[green lantern]

Oh my the libs will hate this! With tax cuts, the US governemnt is taking in MORE money.

So much money the budget deficit is shrinking.

When will libs learn when you cut taxes on the producers - EVERYONE benefits.

The US economy is booming and the left hates this good news.

I do like how the liberal media says "unexpected" increase in tax revenue. Unexpected to whom? The libs?

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid={D431CEFF-CBE7-45D1-B7BC-0EBAEDEC17B7}

Unexpected tax revenue to shrink U.S. budget deficit

By MarketWatch
Last Update: 3:35 PM ET Jul 8, 2006


NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- An unexpected spike in revenue from corporate taxes, individual stock market profits and executive bonuses is curbing the projected budget deficit this year, according to a media report.
The White House on Tuesday is expected to say that tax receipts are about $250 billion higher than they were a year ago, rising twice as fast as the administration forecast, the New York Times reported Saturday.
As a result, the budget deficit will be about $100 billion less than the White House predicted six months ago, the paper said.
The tax receipt windfall has been building for months, but its size and effect on the deficit surprised budget analysts, given the high costs for the war in Iraq and hurricane relief.
Congressional analysts told the Times that the greater-than-expected tax receipts could cut the deficit to $300 billion this year from $318 billion a year ago.
Corporate taxes that have nearly tripled since 2003, executive bonuses, and higher individual taxes on stock market profits are fueling the spike in tax revenue, the paper reported.
The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that corporate tax receipts rose 26% for the nine months ending in June compared with the year-ago period.

this is indeed good news...i just wish we could get the current spending levels cut by another 150 billion dollars...maybe take part of that cut and enter into some partnerships into alternative energy reseach....start weaning us off that middle ease oil teat......start making progress there, and i'll guarantee oil comes down 50 bucks a barrell overnight.

 

[Nuc]

What I eat is irrelavant.

Exactly what poisons and toxicins are in these food products?

Are you goofing? Antibiotics, growth hormones, nitrites, preservatives, etc. etc.

Dude, have you ever heard of mad cow disease? Ever heard of salmonella or e coli?

If you don't think that people who poison other people to make a buck qualify as corrupt then who does? Why are you making excuses for these rip off artists?

 

[red states rule]

this is indeed good news...i just wish we could get the current spending levels cut by another 150 billion dollars...maybe take part of that cut and enter into some partnerships into alternative energy reseach....start weaning us off that middle ease oil teat......start making progress there, and i'll guarantee oil comes down 50 bucks a barrell overnight.

That is why I am hoping the Line Item Veto passes

With 2 new Conservatievs on the SC, it should pass Constitutional muster

The money to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, National Eddowment for the Arts, Needle Exchange programs, and other crap may be a thing of the past

 

[Mr.Conley]

Are you goofing? Antibiotics, growth hormones, nitrites, preservatives, etc. etc.

Dude, have you ever heard of mad cow disease? Ever heard of salmonella or e coli?

If you don't think that people who poison other people to make a buck qualify as corrupt then who does? Why are you making excuses for these rip off artists?

Antibiotics- yes and no. While antibiotic don't hurt us, they do result in antibiotic resistent bacteria that can kill both animals and people. Now we can use other antibiotics, but the work required to develop and scale a new drug is horrendous. Then again, it's not going to directly hurt you or m.
Growth Hormones- these just result in larger, fatter cows. I've never seen any research demonstrating a direct link between cows feed growth hormone and increased death in humans.
Nitrates- Do you mean the stuff they use for fertilizer? Cause if you get rid of that stuff, then we are in for a world of hurt. You and I breath nitrogen all day, every day. We're not affected by it.
Preservatives- yes and no. Some preservatives don't harm us, but stuff like trans fat is really deadly. It depends on what you use.
Mad Cow- the only way a cow can get Mad Cow that we have any influence over is by eating other, dead cow. That's illegal in the states.
Ecoli and Salmonella- one of the pluses of our current system is how it minimizes how prevalent these bacteria are.

 

[MtnBiker]

Why are you making excuses for these rip off artists?

What excuses have I made?

You made a comment about the meat and fast food industry being villainous, I asked a few simple questions to confirm your comment. However in both of your replies you injected personal points that have no relevance to whether or not the meat and fast food industry are villainous. What I eat is irrelavant to your point and I have made no excuses one way or another for such industries. If supporting a claim is too diffucult or aggrivating for you, perhaps you should not attempt to do so in the first place.

 

[Gunny]

What excuses have I made?

You made a comment about the meat and fast food industry being villainous, I asked a few simple questions to confirm your comment. However in both of your replies you injected personal points that have no relevance to whether or not the meat and fast food industry are villainous. What I eat is irrelavant to your point and I have made no excuses one way or another for such industries. If supporting a claim is too diffucult or aggrivating for you, perhaps you should not attempt to do so in the first place.

I would say almost anything prepared for consumption is going to contain a nice list of preservatives. Then, as has been mentioned, what was used to feed what you are eating.

While I am quite sure the food industry as a whole is little concerned with with anyone's personal health, I'm sure they are at least going to take a common sense approach and not intentionally poison people. The reactions in recent years to food anomolies has been swift and surely cut pretty deep into the value of whichever specific vendor was affected.

FWIW, I thought your question was pretty straight-up.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Chimpy's boasting about the "shrinking budget deficit" is nothing more than a case of the emperror still wearing his faaabulous new clothes.

Given that his administration has turned the triple digit budget surpluses that existed before they came into office into triple digit deficits is not a bragging point. The apparent reduction in the deficit from$318 billion to $300 billion is insignificant. Especially given that they offered a more pessimistic budget projection earlier to set up for good, relatively speaking, news revealed yesterday.

With the oldest baby-boomers getting ready to retire in a couple of years, any so-called deficit reductions will be little more than afart in a windstorm. But let's look at the facts:

<blockquote>As he did in his remarks on Saturday, Mr. Bush is sure to use today’s event to credit tax cuts for a projected “surge” in tax revenue. The Treasury is expected to take in about $250 billion more in 2006 than in 2005, for a total take of $2.4 trillion. Devoid of context, the number looks impressive.

In fact, it is $100 billion less than the $2.5 trillion revenue estimate the administration touted when it set out in 2001 to sell its policy of never-ending tax cuts. Even with this year’s bigger haul, real revenue growth during the Bush years will be abysmal, averaging about 0.3 percent per capita, versus an average of nearly 10 percent in all previous post-World War II business cycles. That might be excusable if the recent revenue improvements could reasonably be expected to continue. They cannot. Much of the increase in tax receipts is from corporate profits, high-income investors and super high-earning executives, sources that are just as unpredictable as the financial markets to which they’re inevitably linked.

So, the revenue surge is neither a sign that the tax cuts are working nor of sustainable economic growth. A growing number of economists, most prominently from the Congressional Budget Office, point out that upsurges in revenue are also the result of growing income inequality in the United States, an observation that is consistent with mounting evidence of a rapidly widening gap between the rich and everyone else. As corporations and high- income Americans claim ever more of the economic pie, revenues rise, even if there’s no increase in overall economic growth. - <i><a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/11/opinion/11tues1.html?ex=1310270400&en=527f454960119011&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss>The New York Times</a></i> </blockquote>

Yep, the budget deficits are licked...Mission accomplished. Where have we heard that before?

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bush haters will stop at nothing to, dismiss and downplay, the great ecomic news and this roaring economy

Chimpy could be strangling a girl scout on the White House lawn, and you would just stand by and say, "But she deserves it." Wouldn't you?

 

[KarlMarx]

Chimpy could be strangling a girl scout on the White House lawn, and you would just stand by and say, "But she deserves it." Wouldn't you?

Bull, Bully. Conservatives are pretty critical of Bush. The fact is that many of us are disappointed that he didn't stick to his guns and pushed through a 700 Billion dollar tax cut as he wanted to originally.

 

[Bullypulpit]

Bull, Bully. Conservatives are pretty critical of Bush. The fact is that many of us are disappointed that he didn't stick to his guns and pushed through a 700 Billion dollar tax cut as he wanted to originally.

While I don't reecall mentioning you in my reply to RSR, if I painted with a overly broad brush, I'm sorry.

But as for the tax cuts, I think we should be grateful he failed in that endeavor. Tax cuts in a time of war are so irresponsible as to defy description. Especially given the nature of, and rationale for, the war to begin with.

 

[Hagbard Celine]

The current deficit is still the fourth largest in US history and the fact that the administration put out a low-ball estimate of what it projected the deficit would be so that it could set-up this economic "victory" right before election time to make it seem like its tax cuts are working doesn't change that. Want to put a dent in the deficit? How about scaling-back Congressional and Whitehouse spending?

 

[T-Bor]

Your right, I hate it when the economy is doing good and my pay increases. Libs absolutely hate that. Oh BTW...your an idiot.

Oh my the libs will hate this! With tax cuts, the US governemnt is taking in MORE money.

So much money the budget deficit is shrinking.

When will libs learn when you cut taxes on the producers - EVERYONE benefits.

The US economy is booming and the left hates this good news.

I do like how the liberal media says "unexpected" increase in tax revenue. Unexpected to whom? The libs?

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/story.aspx?guid={D431CEFF-CBE7-45D1-B7BC-0EBAEDEC17B7}

Unexpected tax revenue to shrink U.S. budget deficit

By MarketWatch
Last Update: 3:35 PM ET Jul 8, 2006


NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- An unexpected spike in revenue from corporate taxes, individual stock market profits and executive bonuses is curbing the projected budget deficit this year, according to a media report.
The White House on Tuesday is expected to say that tax receipts are about $250 billion higher than they were a year ago, rising twice as fast as the administration forecast, the New York Times reported Saturday.
As a result, the budget deficit will be about $100 billion less than the White House predicted six months ago, the paper said.
The tax receipt windfall has been building for months, but its size and effect on the deficit surprised budget analysts, given the high costs for the war in Iraq and hurricane relief.
Congressional analysts told the Times that the greater-than-expected tax receipts could cut the deficit to $300 billion this year from $318 billion a year ago.
Corporate taxes that have nearly tripled since 2003, executive bonuses, and higher individual taxes on stock market profits are fueling the spike in tax revenue, the paper reported.
The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that corporate tax receipts rose 26% for the nine months ending in June compared with the year-ago period.

 

[red states rule]

Your right, I hate it when the economy is doing good and my pay increases. Libs absolutely hate that. Oh BTW...your an idiot.

Libs said over and over the tax cuts would wreck the economy, "cost" the government money, and destroy much needed Federal programs.

Once again, Pres Bush has given the left a big sh** burger to eat

Enjoy!

 

[Nuc]

What excuses have I made?

You made a comment about the meat and fast food industry being villainous, I asked a few simple questions to confirm your comment. However in both of your replies you injected personal points that have no relevance to whether or not the meat and fast food industry are villainous. What I eat is irrelavant to your point and I have made no excuses one way or another for such industries. If supporting a claim is too diffucult or aggrivating for you, perhaps you should not attempt to do so in the first place.

My apologies, you just asked me a question. I guess how villainous one considers the food industry to be depends upon how seriously you take food. I take it very seriously, healthwise and aesthetically. For others it's just fuel.

 

[red states rule]

My apologies, you just asked me a question. I guess how villainous one considers the food industry to be depends upon how seriously you take food. I take it very seriously, healthwise and aesthetically. For others it's just fuel.

New DNC talking point:

Republicans want to poison the food, air, and water.

They will kill millions of people.

Then run for reelection

 

[CharlestonChad]

You Bush lovers do realize that decreasing the budget deficit means we are still losing money. We are still paying off debt, by amounting more debt. We are now going to be entering more wars, going further into debt. SS will go broke once all the baby boomers start to collect. There is no good news for the Bush admin unless they can have a budget surplus, only lesser degrees of bad news.




RSR-why all the hatred for democrats? Were you abused as a child by a liberal uncle?

 

[CharlestonChad]

My apologies, you just asked me a question. I guess how villainous one considers the food industry to be depends upon how seriously you take food. I take it very seriously, healthwise and aesthetically. For others it's just fuel.

Ummm, your avatar pic says otherwise, tubby


Fastfood is obviously worse than fresh foods. I'm dirt poor, so I'm forced to eat easy-mac, cereal, and off the wendy's dollar menu, which sucks b/c I know it's doing damage to my health.

 

[BaronVonBigmeat]

Are you goofing? Antibiotics, growth hormones, nitrites, preservatives, etc. etc.

Dude, have you ever heard of mad cow disease? Ever heard of salmonella or e coli?

If you don't think that people who poison other people to make a buck qualify as corrupt then who does? Why are you making excuses for these rip off artists?

Most companies that sell food have a rather strong incentive to not kill customers. Killing customers would be bad for business. Different races, sexes, creeds, and so forth may have different dietary preferences, but The Dead are one demographic that is notoriously stingy when it comes to food consumption.

If you want to eat organic food, you can certainly buy it, although there really doesn't seem to be much benefit from what studies I've seen.

Anyway, back on topic. Here is Richard Daughty's (aka "The Mogambo Guru") take on things.

To illustrate the bizarre, simplistic thinking of the Wall Street Journal, I quote from their July 12 editorial "Soaking the Rich", where they wax enthusiastic about the falling budget deficit, which was reduced by about $115 billion stinking dollars, thanks to an unexpected increase in tax remittances. We still had a deficit of $300 billion, but somehow this reduction from a deficit of over $400 billion is supposed to be such terrific news or something. Hahaha!

The WSJ crows "The real news, and where the policy credit belongs, is with the 2003 tax cuts." Hahahaha! They admit that "Monetary policy has also fueled this expansion, but the tax cuts were perfectly targeted to improve the incentives to take risks among businesses."

The Economist magazine, to its credit and to the embarrassment of the Wall Street Journal, came up with several other alternative reasons why an extra $115 billion in tax revenues could show up, including the fact that wages have been weak, and the savings showed up as profits to corporations, and indeed, capital gains and dividends have soared, which are taxable. Or maybe it was that a bunch of tax breaks for investments expired at the end of 2004, and now those investment expenses are taxable.

Or perhaps it was the unusually big profits of small businesses are taxed at the individual level. Or maybe it was the growing income inequality and the progressive tax system, where the rich got richer (but paid more taxes) and the poor got poorer (but paid the same level of taxes). Or any of a lot of things.

But nobody but the true patriots at Radio Free Mogambo (PFM) made the connection that, for 2005, total credit (debt) expanded by $3.34 trillion. To get a lousy $125 billion in extra taxes out of a $3.34 trillion increase in debt, which increased tax revenues by a miniscule 3.4% of this amount, is hardly a ringing endorsement of the Laffer Curve, as the Wall Street Journal editorial presumed when they said that the cuts "succeeded even beyond Art Laffer's dreams." Hahaha! In YOUR dreams, Wall Street Journal!

To those unfamiliar with the Laffer Curve, it is the idea that for every level of tax revenues, there are two tax rates that will produce them. One is very high, and the other is very low. The high rate produces the tax revenue directly, and the low one increases economic activity so much that more tax revenue is produced. The morons of the world immediately and consistently misinterpret this to mean that every time you reduce taxes, you will always get more tax revenue! Hahahaha!

So pardon me if I do not break out the party hats and balloons to learn that in America, in total, at least $3,400 billion was borrowed and spent last year, and the government got a piddly $115 billion in "extra" tax revenue out of it. Hell, looking only at the government's budget, the national debt went up by $569 billion in the last twelve months, exploding to $8,408 billion, all to satisfy the government's insatiable, insane, bankrupting, ravenous craving for spending. Thus the national debt increased by $7.3% in the last twelve months. Hahaha!

And besides, the Economist magazine also said that profits everywhere around the world had unusual growth and gains, too.

"Richard Daughty is general partner and COO for Smith Consultant Group, serving the financial and medical communities, and the writer/publisher of the Mogambo Guru economic newsletter, an avocational exercise to better heap disrespect on those who desperately deserve it. The Mogambo Guru is quoted frequently in Barron's, The Daily Reckoning, and other fine publications."

ie, he is not some commie-lib pinko-queer democrat.

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Daughty/jul192006.html

 

[gonegolfin]

Anyway, back on topic. Here is Richard Daughty's (aka "The Mogambo Guru") take on things.

"Richard Daughty is general partner and COO for Smith Consultant Group, serving the financial and medical communities, and the writer/publisher of the Mogambo Guru economic newsletter, an avocational exercise to better heap disrespect on those who desperately deserve it. The Mogambo Guru is quoted frequently in Barron's, The Daily Reckoning, and other fine publications."

ie, he is not some commie-lib pinko-queer democrat.

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Daughty/jul192006.html

Daughty has always been a hoot to read. He always begins his articles discussing the amount of Fed Credit issued for the week. It is troublesome that with all of the Fed Credit (= money expansion = borrowed new money into existence) issued last year, that we were only able to shave that amount off of the deficit. That tells you how out of line spending continues to be (and has been for several decades).

Brian (and I am certainly no commie-lib pinko-queer democrat. Just a fiscal conservative. )

 

[red states rule]

You Bush lovers do realize that decreasing the budget deficit means we are still losing money. We are still paying off debt, by amounting more debt. We are now going to be entering more wars, going further into debt. SS will go broke once all the baby boomers start to collect. There is no good news for the Bush admin unless they can have a budget surplus, only lesser degrees of bad news.




RSR-why all the hatred for democrats? Were you abused as a child by a liberal uncle?

No hatred of libs. I want them politically defeated. As long as we have libs like you on display for all to see, our job will be so much easier