'But the constant small mistakes — which have dogged the Trump White House since the president’s official Inauguration Day poster boasted that “no challenge is to great” — have become, critics say, symbolic of the larger problems with Trump’s management style' Keep it up, guys.
In my career in government, I was often struck by how senior people couldn't spell or put a sentence together. To some extent they embraced e-mail, and by now, no doubt texting as well, because it provides a standard excuse for rushing and getting things wrong. Newspapers, as they enter their final years, don't seem to have copy editors. I think there was an era of one kind of worship of credentials: the people who would identify, and enforce, language "standards," including pronunciation. Now there is respect for getting things done, being on the right side, and virtue signalling: why should I bother getting the details right? Trump may be an egregious example because he thinks his career demonstrates that lying may not do any harm, and may do you a lot of good if you maintain message discipline, etc.
Also: that hilarious video of Hillary announcing the "re-set" with Russia. She had the red button, kind of like from Staples, but someone had mistranslated. Staffing problems? American leaders have a history of not speaking foreign languages, and not being able to get the best translators? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLbmqIoyfVo
Thursday’s edition of the US newspaper was posted on Twitter with the headline: “The modest start of a massive march.” It went on to explain: “More than 150,000 people supporting women’s rights have signed up for a rally in Washington the day after the inauguration. It all began with a Facebook post.” Yet, the image accompanying the headline was not of the Venus symbol used to represent women (a circle with a cross at the base). Instead the words were enclosed within a Mars symbol, used to denote men..."
I think Althouse posted on this at the time.
This was a long time ago, of course, back when there were only two genders.
Respectfully, I don't think that "it is down to" spelling and typos.
"Spelling and typos" is a WaPo story. It isn't the only story, not the last story. And I don't think that "it," whatever "it" is, "is down to this" story.
It may be "down to" the investigation of the Department of Justice's Special Counsel.
Hillary was able to write HELP backward with her left hand in the steam on the bathroom window after she fell in the tub and broke her wrist. Let's see Trump do that!
How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts. Deficits are now at the same level as during the Great Recession, while we are in relatively good economic times.
I have been consistent in my concern regarding the deficit. There is no excuse for the deficit to be increasing in this period. It is arson against the nation.
“How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts. Deficits are now at the same level as during the Great Recession, while we are in relatively good economic times”
Laugh out loud funny. Like a pusher handing out DARE bumper stickers.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits.”
Yes, both not a true quote and often misatrributed, but valid nonetheless (fake but accurate! 🤣)
I agree with Beloved on the deficit, but unlike him, I was loudly decrying Obama’s money burning ways, which Beloved covers for his looking the other way at the time. Germany didn’t do the kind of deficit spending that Obama did, and yet, their economy seems to be going great guns, as it has for some time, while it took a decade for ours to recover.
The corporate tax cuts were long overdue, and while I wouldn’t have cut personal income taxes, and BTW, I could buy a nice German car with my savings, it will be an interesting experiment to see if revenues actually do rise, since this seems like the ideal test case for that hypothesis.
I was watching the History Channel and they had a program on Hitler and instead of describing the really horrible stuff that he did, the death camps, the invasions, the complete disregard for national sovereignty , “Imagine there;s no borders..” Hitler already did that! But instead of those things, they were describing Hitler in terms of personal foibles that sounded remarkably like the mainstream descriptions of Trump. So I looked for the production date of the documentary and of course it’s 2018.
Good conformists never make typos, that’s really why the left is so obsessed with spelling. I am more of the Mark Twain school of thought, I don’t have a high regard for a man who only knows one way to spell a word.
Bay Area Guy said... Trump's been President for 1 year.
And during that time the trajectory has dramatically increased in the wrong direction, thanks to tax cuts that were unaccompanied by spending cuts. Do the hard thing first.
I do favor cutting entitlements, although the lack of savings amongst elderly Americans is going to make this very difficult. Means testing is probably the only way to do this at this point, but that has its own problems.
At the end of the day, its not Trump who is racking up huge deficit spending... Its CONGRESS, and right now the GOPe / RINO wing is spending like a drunken sailor on EVERYTHING that the Democrats want, and NOTHING that Trump has asked for... so I think blaming Trump for this is both ridiculous and disingenuous... Congress has a spending problem, and like a crack-addict, they refuse to stop... And I find it rich that lefties, who said nothing as Obama wracked up ***10 TRILLION*** dollars of new debt in 8 years, are not SOOOO concerned about the budget... You people are such hypocrites, it makes me sick...
I do favor cutting entitlements, although the lack of savings amongst elderly Americans is going to make this very difficult.
I notice a lot, in Vermont, and in Boston, elderly immigrants, who apparently speak no English, many still dressing in their native costumes, here living in the United States, using resources intended for our own elderly, medical and housing, and wonder what the benefit to the United States is to let these people who had lived out almost their entire lives in a foreign country, contributing to that country, but not to this, to bring them in and care for them? Aid to their country of origin would probably, dollar for dollar, go a lot further.
I know, I know, the “benefit” they bring is straight line votes for Democrats. Noticing this makes me a Nazi.
Also, Obama loosened up the requirements to get on SSDI, putting more strain on a system that is going to be greatly strained by not just the aging of Baby Boomers, but by increases in longevity. The only real path forward is to grow out of the mess, and that means growing the economy, and immigration programs aimed not at bringing in more clients for the Democrat Party, people almost guaranteed to join the long term poor, but programs aimed at people with the skills we need.
You got your dancing Hitler's, your singing Hitler's and your grammar and spelling Hitler's.
ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit? When the Democrats propose a budget that is balanced in the fiscal year it's passed then I'll take them (and you) seriously. Until then better more money in my pocket than in the pockets of people who aren't compensating me for my money.
I guess it makes sense to rescue these people into the US at post economic contribution ages if you sincerely believe that their countries of origin are “shitholes.”
And by “programs” for skilled immigrants, I. don’t mean H1b visas, which bring in indentured servants as a sop to the billionaires, people who can’t change jobs, and thereby force up wages. for everybody. No, I am talking about bringing in new free citizens to the US who will contribute to the new economy which requires skills and education. We have all the unskilled uneducated people we need, and we shouldn’t be making live harder for them by increasing competition among them for jobs.
It'd be a simple enough matter to shut him up with a link, no? That would be dispositive, unlike playing IKYABWAI with tim in vermont, which may be reasonably construed as evasion.
So no actual argument defending the massive Trump deficits?
The closest thing to "defending the massive Trump deficits" I've seen in this thread is some chucklehead upstream saying "How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts". As taxes have already been cut, one can infer that the chucklehead in question is gearing up for some bad faith maneuvering about the impossibility of any spending cuts now. But you're right, no actual argument was offered why tax cuts logically preclude any spending cuts.
cubanbob said... ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit?
The size of the deficit and particularly the direction it is going in is critical. We are currently in relatively good economic times. What happens when the global economy tanks again?
"It'd be a simple enough matter to shut him up with a link, no? That would be dispositive, unlike playing IKYABWAI with tim in vermont, which may be reasonably construed as evasion."
LMAO. You're correct of course, but that would require actual proof from ARM, which he doesn't have.
If the claim is that I have been inconsistent on the deficits, then that claim should be backed up with some proof. I was nervous about the large deficits immediately following the Great Bush Recession but, like most, I ultimately saw this as a necessary evil to avoid a depression. This did work out in the sense that we outperformed most of the EU countries in coping with the Recession. Since then however you will not find any support from me for deficits. I think it is insane.
I find it completely hypocritical that the same people who decried the large deficits after the great Recession now have nothing to say about equally large deficits in a time of relative economic stability.
If the claim is that I have been inconsistent on the deficits, then that claim should be backed up with some proof.
Others are using precisely the same level of proof to condemn you that you are using to condemn them. So obviously it's not the method or standard that you're objecting to here.
I find it completely hypocritical that the same people who decried the large deficits after the great Recession now have nothing to say about equally large deficits in a time of relative economic stability.
ARM, if you expect everyone else to take your word for it that, despite never mentioning it here, you were indeed deeply concerned about the deficits under Obama, then you are morally obligated to extend to the same charitable interpretation to everyone else's "nothing to say".
To expect otherwise would be completely hypocritical.
ARM, if you expect everyone else to take your word for it that, despite never mentioning it here, you were indeed deeply concerned about the deficits under Obama, then you are morally obligated to extend to the same charitable interpretation to everyone else's "nothing to say".
To expect otherwise would be completely hypocritical.
One of the defining characteristics of the modern Left is hypocrisy.
Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said... Others are using precisely the same level of proof to condemn you that you are using to condemn them.
This is obviously not true. The Tea Party movement was broadly lauded here, fighting against the increase in deficits immediately following the financial crash. I disagreed with their reasoning. Events appear to have supported my side of the argument. These same people should be apoplectic about the current deficit levels, which have no argument in their favor, unlike deficit spending during a massive recession.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said... cubanbob said... ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit?
The size of the deficit and particularly the direction it is going in is critical. We are currently in relatively good economic times. What happens when the global economy tanks again?"
ARM what happens is what happen when Obama and the Democrats were in charge; more borrowing and spending! More shovel ready BS and more cash for clunkers, more of this and more of that and raising my taxes. Now that tax rates have been reduced what spending cuts to close or eliminate the deficit are you proposing? Or is every dollar of federal spending untouchable? Here is a modest suggestion:take the last relatively successful Democrat president's budget ( Bill Clinton despite himself) and adjust for population and inflation and use that adjusted figure for current spending. We would have either a balanced budget or a very small deficit. If the Democrats were serious deficit hawks they would propose doing just that.
To answer your implied question of what really happens in the end is hyperinflation which has the virtue of eliminating internal debt by using debased currency to pay off the facial debt. A tried and true debt repayment scheme used in Latin America. The Germans used this scheme to eliminate their WW1 debt. That was the great success of Weimar Germany. That the cure had horrific consequences doesn't detract from the fact that Weimar paid off the Kaiser's war debt (to German bondholders). Interesting read on Germany's hyperinflation, "When Money Dies". America is so blessed that all of our national debt, domestic and foreign is in US Dollars and can be inflated away. Other countries aren't so fortunate that their foreign debt and domestic debt are denominated in their national debt. Those countries can inflate their domestic debt away, the foreign debt they will have to resort to Argentina style haircuts to the lenders.
320Busdriver said... The long term deficit / debt outlook has been baked in for eternity.
I agree with this, but both the Bush tax cuts, the Great Recession and now the Trump tax cuts have made the final reckoning significantly worse. Support for old people are will suck the vitality out of the economy making it even harder to repay the debt.
Bob Boyd said... Hillary was able to write HELP backward with her left hand in the steam on the bathroom window after she fell in the tub and broke her wrist. Let's see Trump do that!
Bullshit! Everyone knows that Huma was there with a boar bristle brush and a bar of Fels-Naptha Soap giving Hillary's! nether regions a good scrub.
I, too, applaud ARM's recent discovery of the dangers of debt. Better late than never.
ARM, like all leftists, only worry about deficits when Republicans are in office.
I notice a lot, in Vermont, and in Boston, elderly immigrants, who apparently speak no English, many still dressing in their native costumes, here living in the United States, using resources intended for our own elderly, medical and housing, and wonder what the benefit to the United States is to let these people who had lived out almost their entire lives in a foreign country, contributing to that country, but not to this, to bring them in and care for them? Aid to their country of origin would probably, dollar for dollar, go a lot further.
The destruction of Social Security took a long time but is nearly complete. The addition of SSDI and the broadening of it led the slide but the Clinton era borrowing was abetted by Hastert's GOP.
The Trust Fund, memorably described by Al Gore as a "Lock Box" is full of IOUs from the 90s Congress.
ARM is using this weak club to beat Trump and is quite in style for leftists.
They are back encouraging "liar loans" and the next mortgage meltdown will be a doozy.
The Administrative State, another term for the Deep State simply cannot be trusted around money.
Any money that is not theirs. Of course all money is theirs in their opinion since we deplorables cannot be expected to use it wisely.
Some of us use it to buy guns. That's actually pretty wise.
It's amusing to see ARM complain about Trump's tax cuts and not about the Congress, spending bill.
Some of the highlights include full funding for Cuck Schemer's Hudson rail tunnel while Palsi Pelosi is crowing that the bill is a Democrat victory because it severely limits border wall construction. Other juicy nuggets include full funding for Planned Parenthood as well as Sanctuary Cities. Well, at least Obamacare won't be bailed out. Except that Susan "Sahara C**t" Collins" is expecting McConnell to allow a floor vote for her amendment that includes now a $30 billion bailout. Problem is McConnell refused to allow a Luap the Lesser amendment the last time around and got roundly criticized for it, but that's another story.
"Crying over spelt milk." "Got off on the wrong font" Those two made me laugh. "Don't cry over mis-spelt milque," is my lame contribution. Blogger Anita Brookner might have commented,"Thyme misspelt in youth is sometimes all the freedom one ever has."
ARM, I take it you were a full throated supporter of W's attempt to privatize a meagre portion of SS? And that all of your political contributions go to the Freedom Caucus?
It has always dismayed me that the difference between being a critic, and being a critical thinker has lost its distinction.
So obvious, apparently, that you didn't feel the need to point out why it was false, and instead immediately segued into a Chuck-like digression referencing an argument you made *against* the wisdom of deficit reduction during the Obama administration, contra the Tea-partiers at the time.
Now, you may or may not be correct about why reducing deficits is not a good idea under Condition X. That much is sane in itself, if neither here nor there. What's silly is contending that the above digression "proves" both that you do and always have had principled, consistent concerns about deficits (it tells us nothing about that, one way or the other), and that other people here do not, and are themselves the partisan hypocrites that they are accusing you of being (ditto).
Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof. I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.
ARM: Remind me again, who controls the House and Senate.
The Republicans, of course. Your point? (Not that they aren't pining to go back to business-as-usual as the minority party.)
And, of course, the Presidency.
A guy most beltwayvians, Republican as well as Democrat, would love to see floating face-down in the Potomac. (Not, mind you, that he's any better on the score of military/welfare-state spending than they are, but I didn't vote for him with the expectation that he was.)
I continue to be charmed by your innocent maiden-aunt understanding of politics in this country.
Chuck said...Respectfully, I don't think that "it is down to" spelling and typos. "Spelling and typos" is a WaPo story. It isn't the only story, not the last story -- Respecfully, thanks for that clarification...
ARM, I tried to tell you who controls the House and Senate but you ignore me, which makes me sad.
Mark Twain, in much simpler times before The Great Society, which will kill off this country, said "No man's life, liberty or property is safe when Congress is in session."
The present political order in this country will not survive The Great Society.
Democrats use arguments as they seem to apply. If times are good, the GOP is starving the poor. If times are poor, the GOP is starving the poor.
See how that works?
Raising taxes is always good. Cutting spending is always bad.
Like ARM, I'm worried about the deficit. We have a spending problem. As ARM also notes, we don't at the moment have a revenue problem. I used to think these were interrelated: your spending and your revenue should inform one another. That's how solvent households and firms work. It's not how government works. Sometimes we have revenue problems, sometimes we don't. We always have spending problems. It's possible there's no way to resolve the spending problem in our current form of government. There's no incentive for political leaders to do so. The only discipline that matters with spending is whether there is access to money to pay the bills. The spending problem will be addressed when checks stop going out to people, and it will be addressed seriously when the people expecting that money are large enough in number and influence to make a difference.
It will not kvetching about the budget that resolves our spending problem. It will be when what's happening in Illinois spreads to other states and gets worse. In the meantime, I hope that we spend on things that are useful after that collapse. I think that's about the best you can do if you're concerned about the deficit: hope that the spending is on things that will have some value while we rebuild our finances.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said... "Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof. I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now."
Perhaps because the commenters here don't argue with fascists? Just a thought. On topic. Trump will send Ryans budget back to congress.
ARM: Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof.
Just like the claim you made regarding the beliefs of other posters here without any proof.
I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.
IOW, you're still making claims about the beliefs of other posters here without providing any proof about the beliefs of other posters here.
P.S. Reposting the same meandering, illogical shit repeatedly won't magically transform it into a good argument.
It is worthwhile trying to understand how our governors believe they are going to pay off the deficit - through growth, which will make the debt smaller or at least manageable relative to the size of the economy. This is why there is never going to be any serious restrictions on immigration. The only way to grow the economy is through population growth or increases in productivity. Only a tiny part of the government's spending is invested in R&D so it is unlikely that productivity increases will be sufficient. That leaves population growth.
Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said... Just like the claim you made regarding the beliefs of other posters here without any proof.
No, fundamentally different. No statement has been attributed to me in which I laud deficits, can't get enough of them, or in any other way suggest that the bigger the deficit the better. Nor have I ever compared deficits to mother's milk or apple pie.
In contrast, many here, possibly a majority, have identified with a group nominally devoted to deficit reduction, yet remain silent in the face of indefensible deficit increases.
" This is why there is never going to be any serious restrictions on immigration. The only way to grow the economy is through population growth or increases in productivity."
Yes, importing millions of illiterate peasants will work fine at growing the economy.
Do you think about this or just repost DNC talking points ?
What are the numbers on how many new "immigrants" are on welfare ? Of course, those numbers are not available.
You can always tell a Democrat because he/she is the one who thinks a 100% tax rate would bring in lots of revenue.
Why are they blaming Trump? Blame schools for not teaching spelling-- relying on the lazy person's answer-- phonetic spelling and spell check-- so many correctly spelled words-- just not the right word. Does anyone proof read their work anymore?
The entire time mueller has had key anti trump people under his thumb accomplishing little, Jeff Sessions & OIG Horowitz have been documenting the coup & building criminal cases. 31. Andrew McCabe was permitted a lawyer bc he's almost certainly under indictment; Horowitz has a prosecutor & a grand jury empaneled. The way OPR handled McCabe proves it. 32. Sit back and watch: these media attacks are the death throes of this conspiracy. Breaking McCabe was the beginning. This is well under way.
“I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.”
They’re still trying to get their applications through the IRS.
RE: tax cuts -- yes, increased deficit spending isn't great. But my bigger issue with these tax cuts (and basically all tax cuts that have ever passed during my lifetime) is that with every tax cut, the political necessity of giving a tax cut to the middle class has increased our dependence on high income earners. That, in turn, increases the volatility of our tax receipts, which I think tends to encourage wasteful spending in boom years that we then have to borrow to sustain as soon as the boom ends (because even just cutting the rate of increase in spending on any government program would be absolutely unthinkable -- it's the thin end of the wedge! Next they'll be throwing old people off cliffs).
Sarcasm aside, look at our receipts between 2008 and 2009. Individual income tax drops by $200 billion ($1.14 trillion to $915 billion) between 2008 and 2009. Meanwhile, FICA receipts drop by only $10 million ($900 billion down to $890 billion). True, FICA continues to drop in 2010 and 2011 (probably because people continued to lose their jobs), but even at its nadir ($818 billion in 2011), the decline is less than $100 billion. And that's what you'd expect -- the FICA tax base is much more stable because it taxes everyone equally (up to your first $120K or so of income).
For what it's worth, corporate taxes are even more volatile than individual income taxes, in percentage terms (between 2007 and 2009, they drop from $370 billion to $138 billion, or over 60%), but even there, they're a much smaller contributor to the federal government's overall tax receipts, and a smaller net contributor to tax receipt volatility.
Deficits and the debt isn't a problem as long as interest rates remain low, and there's no reason to think they won't remain low.
The government's deficit is the private sector's surplus. If the federal gov spends 100 and only taxes back 90, that's 10 more out there in the private sector economy to be used by people like us. A growing economy requires a growing money supply.
If interest rates were going up quickly (they aren't), or we were at full employment (we aren't anywhere near), or wages were going up rapidly (they aren't), then running big deficits would begin to matter.
Don't think even for a second that the federal government needs to be run like a household. A balanced budget would throw us into a huge depression.
One reason I ended my subscription last month. I just couldn't take the anti Trump stance. In regard to the Jeff Bezos buyout of the Post in the above section, I think it has changed the WaPo. They've always been leftist, but I have counted as many as 15 anti-Trump headlines on the online front page. It gets boring. Why bother to pay my monthly fee to get opinion news and no factual news. Of course, the paper Jeff Bezos owns is going to take the liberal techies views and run with them.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
108 comments:
Trump is Hilter.
Former President Obama had a comment on this: "Um....ah...er...um...ta say....ah..ah...um....um"
'But the constant small mistakes — which have dogged the Trump White House since the president’s official Inauguration Day poster boasted that “no challenge is to great” — have become, critics say, symbolic of the larger problems with Trump’s management style'
Keep it up, guys.
Trump is literally worse than Hitler. You didn't see typos in communications from the bunker. Didya?
From what I gather, the spelling and punctuation in Hillary's book about why she will never be President is impeccable.
Covfefe rules.
Crying over spelt milk.
These people are completely and utterly unhinged... It's truly scary...
The Austrians have a word for it.
In my career in government, I was often struck by how senior people couldn't spell or put a sentence together. To some extent they embraced e-mail, and by now, no doubt texting as well, because it provides a standard excuse for rushing and getting things wrong. Newspapers, as they enter their final years, don't seem to have copy editors. I think there was an era of one kind of worship of credentials: the people who would identify, and enforce, language "standards," including pronunciation. Now there is respect for getting things done, being on the right side, and virtue signalling: why should I bother getting the details right? Trump may be an egregious example because he thinks his career demonstrates that lying may not do any harm, and may do you a lot of good if you maintain message discipline, etc.
Also: that hilarious video of Hillary announcing the "re-set" with Russia. She had the red button, kind of like from Staples, but someone had mistranslated. Staffing problems? American leaders have a history of not speaking foreign languages, and not being able to get the best translators? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLbmqIoyfVo
Let's hope this was a typo:
The US' national debt is rising 36% faster than the economy
Four dimensional chaos.
The Washington Post Express has been forced to apologise after an embarrassing error on its cover story about women’s rights.
Thursday’s edition of the US newspaper was posted on Twitter with the headline: “The modest start of a massive march.”
It went on to explain: “More than 150,000 people supporting women’s rights have signed up for a rally in Washington the day after the inauguration. It all began with a Facebook post.”
Yet, the image accompanying the headline was not of the Venus symbol used to represent women (a circle with a cross at the base). Instead the words were enclosed within a Mars symbol, used to denote men..."
I think Althouse posted on this at the time.
This was a long time ago, of course, back when there were only two genders.
The Germans have a word for this.
Respectfully, I don't think that "it is down to" spelling and typos.
"Spelling and typos" is a WaPo story. It isn't the only story, not the last story. And I don't think that "it," whatever "it" is, "is down to this" story.
It may be "down to" the investigation of the Department of Justice's Special Counsel.
Hillary was able to write HELP backward with her left hand in the steam on the bathroom window after she fell in the tub and broke her wrist.
Let's see Trump do that!
A-Doh! Hitler: Fuhrer's spelling woes revealed as postcard resurfaces at roadshow after 100 years
Oh for god's sake. Slow news day for the Trump bashing syndicate.
-sw
Sometimes it's a typo, sometimes it's the font itself.
Made me think of this:
Althouse" Wrong Font?
All that Hitlers is not Gold.
The Germans have a word for this.
On the other hand, so long as he and the White House don't use "I" when "me" is appropriate it's all ok by me. There is a word for this in English.
-sw
The national debt is a HUGE concern.
Has been, for many of us for decades. Hence the TEA Party.
Then it went ballistic in 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012...
Perhaps I missed all those on the left expressing this concern over the past 8 years.
Glad you finally came around. You WILL stick around and vote against the worst spenders in the future, right?
2700 comments discussing this vital issue with passion and erudition.
I have a draem and I have a deram.
How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts. Deficits are now at the same level as during the Great Recession, while we are in relatively good economic times.
JAORE: Glad you finally came around. You WILL stick around and vote against the worst spenders in the future, right?
I, too, applaud ARM's recent discovery of the dangers of debt. Better late than never.
If I can be they, anything goes.
Since spelling rules are a vestige of white supremacy, the Trump WH should just promote word equality.
The Left can read his mind, just not his spelling
The cross at the bottom of the Venus symbol is supposed to represent her hand mirror. I don't know what she was looking at.
I have been consistent in my concern regarding the deficit. There is no excuse for the deficit to be increasing in this period. It is arson against the nation.
“How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts. Deficits are now at the same level as during the Great Recession, while we are in relatively good economic times”
Laugh out loud funny. Like a pusher handing out DARE bumper stickers.
"Trump is Hilter."
Althouse, it was actually John Cleese who was Hilter. Hilarious Monty Python sketch.
So no actual argument defending the massive Trump deficits?
To ARM:
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits.”
Yes, both not a true quote and often misatrributed, but valid nonetheless (fake but accurate! 🤣)
And. Included misspellings to keep it on topic to this thread! 🤣🤣🤣
"I have been consistent in my concern regarding the deficit."
Utter bullshit. Never raised concerns about the deficit or the debt under Obama. Prove that you did. Back up your words. Up yer fookin' game, nitwit.
The quote is more than two hundred years old. Democracy seems to be doing fine.
I agree with Beloved on the deficit, but unlike him, I was loudly decrying Obama’s money burning ways, which Beloved covers for his looking the other way at the time. Germany didn’t do the kind of deficit spending that Obama did, and yet, their economy seems to be going great guns, as it has for some time, while it took a decade for ours to recover.
The corporate tax cuts were long overdue, and while I wouldn’t have cut personal income taxes, and BTW, I could buy a nice German car with my savings, it will be an interesting experiment to see if revenues actually do rise, since this seems like the ideal test case for that hypothesis.
Kyzernick ... Up yer fookin' game, nitwit
I can't remember Tim responding favorably to this book (which I thought was prescient at the time):
Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America
Typos = CHAOS!
I was watching the History Channel and they had a program on Hitler and instead of describing the really horrible stuff that he did, the death camps, the invasions, the complete disregard for national sovereignty , “Imagine there;s no borders..” Hitler already did that! But instead of those things, they were describing Hitler in terms of personal foibles that sounded remarkably like the mainstream descriptions of Trump. So I looked for the production date of the documentary and of course it’s 2018.
Propagandists never sleep.
"First, he was Hitler, then... then... then... and now, it's down to this:"
Would it surprise anyone to learn Hitler was the original inventor of "White Out"?
Had he survived the bunker he could have sued Mike Nesmith's mother for patent infringement.
It's time to reign in you're worship at the alter of spell-check.
Good conformists never make typos, that’s really why the left is so obsessed with spelling. I am more of the Mark Twain school of thought, I don’t have a high regard for a man who only knows one way to spell a word.
If ever there was a post that cried out for a Scott Adams tag, this is it.
@BCARM,
"So no actual argument defending the massive Trump deficits?"
Trump's been President for 1 year. The National Debt has been accumulating for nearly 40 years.
The only way to reduce the National Debt is to:
1. Greatly cut entitlements (Social Security, Medi-care)
Are you for that?
2. Greatly cut defense
I do suspect you are for this, and you have a point, here.
"rigor to the accuracy?" That doesn't sound like proper English to me . . .
I think the writer may have meant "fidelity" or "attention," rather than "rigor."
Bay Area Guy said...
Trump's been President for 1 year.
And during that time the trajectory has dramatically increased in the wrong direction, thanks to tax cuts that were unaccompanied by spending cuts. Do the hard thing first.
I do favor cutting entitlements, although the lack of savings amongst elderly Americans is going to make this very difficult. Means testing is probably the only way to do this at this point, but that has its own problems.
At the end of the day, its not Trump who is racking up huge deficit spending... Its CONGRESS, and right now the GOPe / RINO wing is spending like a drunken sailor on EVERYTHING that the Democrats want, and NOTHING that Trump has asked for... so I think blaming Trump for this is both ridiculous and disingenuous... Congress has a spending problem, and like a crack-addict, they refuse to stop... And I find it rich that lefties, who said nothing as Obama wracked up ***10 TRILLION*** dollars of new debt in 8 years, are not SOOOO concerned about the budget... You people are such hypocrites, it makes me sick...
not == now
I do favor cutting entitlements, although the lack of savings amongst elderly Americans is going to make this very difficult.
I notice a lot, in Vermont, and in Boston, elderly immigrants, who apparently speak no English, many still dressing in their native costumes, here living in the United States, using resources intended for our own elderly, medical and housing, and wonder what the benefit to the United States is to let these people who had lived out almost their entire lives in a foreign country, contributing to that country, but not to this, to bring them in and care for them? Aid to their country of origin would probably, dollar for dollar, go a lot further.
I know, I know, the “benefit” they bring is straight line votes for Democrats. Noticing this makes me a Nazi.
Also, Obama loosened up the requirements to get on SSDI, putting more strain on a system that is going to be greatly strained by not just the aging of Baby Boomers, but by increases in longevity. The only real path forward is to grow out of the mess, and that means growing the economy, and immigration programs aimed not at bringing in more clients for the Democrat Party, people almost guaranteed to join the long term poor, but programs aimed at people with the skills we need.
I know, more Nazi stuff.
You got your dancing Hitler's, your singing Hitler's and your grammar and spelling Hitler's.
ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit? When the Democrats propose a budget that is balanced in the fiscal year it's passed then I'll take them (and you) seriously. Until then better more money in my pocket than in the pockets of people who aren't compensating me for my money.
I guess it makes sense to rescue these people into the US at post economic contribution ages if you sincerely believe that their countries of origin are “shitholes.”
And by “programs” for skilled immigrants, I. don’t mean H1b visas, which bring in indentured servants as a sop to the billionaires, people who can’t change jobs, and thereby force up wages. for everybody. No, I am talking about bringing in new free citizens to the US who will contribute to the new economy which requires skills and education. We have all the unskilled uneducated people we need, and we shouldn’t be making live harder for them by increasing competition among them for jobs.
BCARM: Kyzernick ... Up yer fookin' game, nitwit.
It'd be a simple enough matter to shut him up with a link, no? That would be dispositive, unlike playing IKYABWAI with tim in vermont, which may be reasonably construed as evasion.
So no actual argument defending the massive Trump deficits?
The closest thing to "defending the massive Trump deficits" I've seen in this thread is some chucklehead upstream saying "How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts". As taxes have already been cut, one can infer that the chucklehead in question is gearing up for some bad faith maneuvering about the impossibility of any spending cuts now. But you're right, no actual argument was offered why tax cuts logically preclude any spending cuts.
cubanbob said...
ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit?
The size of the deficit and particularly the direction it is going in is critical. We are currently in relatively good economic times. What happens when the global economy tanks again?
"It'd be a simple enough matter to shut him up with a link, no? That would be dispositive, unlike playing IKYABWAI with tim in vermont, which may be reasonably construed as evasion."
LMAO. You're correct of course, but that would require actual proof from ARM, which he doesn't have.
If I had more time I would have written the letter with fewer typos.
-sw
Kyzernick ... LMAO
Jesus. Everyone no's that noone can spel anymore. I blaim Facebook.
If the claim is that I have been inconsistent on the deficits, then that claim should be backed up with some proof. I was nervous about the large deficits immediately following the Great Bush Recession but, like most, I ultimately saw this as a necessary evil to avoid a depression. This did work out in the sense that we outperformed most of the EU countries in coping with the Recession. Since then however you will not find any support from me for deficits. I think it is insane.
I find it completely hypocritical that the same people who decried the large deficits after the great Recession now have nothing to say about equally large deficits in a time of relative economic stability.
What are the snowflakes bitching about?
Trump and the "conservatives" are about to embark on a purely Democratic spending spree.
The opposition party looks to be giddy over this. Whats not to love about Trump when he appears to support everything they do.
Well, he can't spell.
Did ya'@ll get a 13% increase in your pay, because thats how much this latest bill grows leviathan.
Up is down, now I find myself agreeing with ARM.. must be time to go to work. And pay off some debt.
Error prone news releases for the error prone news in your rag. Call it efficiency.
Begs for the Downfall treatment..
And during that time the trajectory has dramatically increased in the wrong direction, thanks to tax cuts that were unaccompanied by spending cuts.
Only in a static world does this make sense. Real world economies are dynamic. People respond to incentives
If the claim is that I have been inconsistent on the deficits, then that claim should be backed up with some proof.
Others are using precisely the same level of proof to condemn you that you are using to condemn them. So obviously it's not the method or standard that you're objecting to here.
I find it completely hypocritical that the same people who decried the large deficits after the great Recession now have nothing to say about equally large deficits in a time of relative economic stability.
ARM, if you expect everyone else to take your word for it that, despite never mentioning it here, you were indeed deeply concerned about the deficits under Obama, then you are morally obligated to extend to the same charitable interpretation to everyone else's "nothing to say".
To expect otherwise would be completely hypocritical.
The long term deficit / debt outlook has been baked in for eternity.
It's called demographics.
Medicare/Medicaid are the drivers and soon there will be 80M seniors. Good luck!
ARM, if you expect everyone else to take your word for it that, despite never mentioning it here, you were indeed deeply concerned about the deficits under Obama, then you are morally obligated to extend to the same charitable interpretation to everyone else's "nothing to say".
To expect otherwise would be completely hypocritical.
One of the defining characteristics of the modern Left is hypocrisy.
Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...
Others are using precisely the same level of proof to condemn you that you are using to condemn them.
This is obviously not true. The Tea Party movement was broadly lauded here, fighting against the increase in deficits immediately following the financial crash. I disagreed with their reasoning. Events appear to have supported my side of the argument. These same people should be apoplectic about the current deficit levels, which have no argument in their favor, unlike deficit spending during a massive recession.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
cubanbob said...
ARM what difference does it make as long as there is a deficit?
The size of the deficit and particularly the direction it is going in is critical. We are currently in relatively good economic times. What happens when the global economy tanks again?"
ARM what happens is what happen when Obama and the Democrats were in charge; more borrowing and spending! More shovel ready BS and more cash for clunkers, more of this and more of that and raising my taxes. Now that tax rates have been reduced what spending cuts to close or eliminate the deficit are you proposing? Or is every dollar of federal spending untouchable? Here is a modest suggestion:take the last relatively successful Democrat president's budget ( Bill Clinton despite himself) and adjust for population and inflation and use that adjusted figure for current spending. We would have either a balanced budget or a very small deficit. If the Democrats were serious deficit hawks they would propose doing just that.
To answer your implied question of what really happens in the end is hyperinflation which has the virtue of eliminating internal debt by using debased currency to pay off the facial debt. A tried and true debt repayment scheme used in Latin America. The Germans used this scheme to eliminate their WW1 debt. That was the great success of Weimar Germany. That the cure had horrific consequences doesn't detract from the fact that Weimar paid off the Kaiser's war debt (to German bondholders). Interesting read on Germany's hyperinflation, "When Money Dies". America is so blessed that all of our national debt, domestic and foreign is in US Dollars and can be inflated away. Other countries aren't so fortunate that their foreign debt and domestic debt are denominated in their national debt. Those countries can inflate their domestic debt away, the foreign debt they will have to resort to Argentina style haircuts to the lenders.
320Busdriver said...
The long term deficit / debt outlook has been baked in for eternity.
I agree with this, but both the Bush tax cuts, the Great Recession and now the Trump tax cuts have made the final reckoning significantly worse. Support for old people are will suck the vitality out of the economy making it even harder to repay the debt.
Bob Boyd said...
Hillary was able to write HELP backward with her left hand in the steam on the bathroom window after she fell in the tub and broke her wrist.
Let's see Trump do that!
Bullshit! Everyone knows that Huma was there with a boar bristle brush and a bar of Fels-Naptha Soap giving Hillary's! nether regions a good scrub.
I, too, applaud ARM's recent discovery of the dangers of debt. Better late than never.
ARM, like all leftists, only worry about deficits when Republicans are in office.
I notice a lot, in Vermont, and in Boston, elderly immigrants, who apparently speak no English, many still dressing in their native costumes, here living in the United States, using resources intended for our own elderly, medical and housing, and wonder what the benefit to the United States is to let these people who had lived out almost their entire lives in a foreign country, contributing to that country, but not to this, to bring them in and care for them? Aid to their country of origin would probably, dollar for dollar, go a lot further.
The destruction of Social Security took a long time but is nearly complete. The addition of SSDI and the broadening of it led the slide but the Clinton era borrowing was abetted by Hastert's GOP.
The Trust Fund, memorably described by Al Gore as a "Lock Box" is full of IOUs from the 90s Congress.
ARM is using this weak club to beat Trump and is quite in style for leftists.
They are back encouraging "liar loans" and the next mortgage meltdown will be a doozy.
The Administrative State, another term for the Deep State simply cannot be trusted around money.
Any money that is not theirs. Of course all money is theirs in their opinion since we deplorables cannot be expected to use it wisely.
Some of us use it to buy guns. That's actually pretty wise.
Nice summary cubanbob.
It's amusing to see ARM complain about Trump's tax cuts and not about the Congress, spending bill.
Some of the highlights include full funding for Cuck Schemer's Hudson rail tunnel while Palsi Pelosi is crowing that the bill is a Democrat victory because it severely limits border wall construction. Other juicy nuggets include full funding for Planned Parenthood as well as Sanctuary Cities. Well, at least Obamacare won't be bailed out. Except that Susan "Sahara C**t" Collins" is expecting McConnell to allow a floor vote for her amendment that includes now a $30 billion bailout. Problem is McConnell refused to allow a Luap the Lesser amendment the last time around and got roundly criticized for it, but that's another story.
More at the link.
Remind me again, who controls the House and Senate. And, of course, the Presidency.
"Crying over spelt milk." "Got off on the wrong font"
Those two made me laugh. "Don't cry over mis-spelt milque," is my lame contribution. Blogger Anita Brookner might have commented,"Thyme misspelt in youth is sometimes all the freedom one ever has."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Brookner
ARM, I take it you were a full throated supporter of W's attempt to privatize a meagre portion of SS? And that all of your political contributions go to the Freedom Caucus?
It has always dismayed me that the difference between being a critic, and being a critical thinker has lost its distinction.
Blogger Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Remind me again, who controls the House and Senate
The spenders ?
ARM: This is obviously not true.
So obvious, apparently, that you didn't feel the need to point out why it was false, and instead immediately segued into a Chuck-like digression referencing an argument you made *against* the wisdom of deficit reduction during the Obama administration, contra the Tea-partiers at the time.
Now, you may or may not be correct about why reducing deficits is not a good idea under Condition X. That much is sane in itself, if neither here nor there. What's silly is contending that the above digression "proves" both that you do and always have had principled, consistent concerns about deficits (it tells us nothing about that, one way or the other), and that other people here do not, and are themselves the partisan hypocrites that they are accusing you of being (ditto).
Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof. I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.
ARM: Remind me again, who controls the House and Senate.
The Republicans, of course. Your point? (Not that they aren't pining to go back to business-as-usual as the minority party.)
And, of course, the Presidency.
A guy most beltwayvians, Republican as well as Democrat, would love to see floating face-down in the Potomac. (Not, mind you, that he's any better on the score of military/welfare-state spending than they are, but I didn't vote for him with the expectation that he was.)
I continue to be charmed by your innocent maiden-aunt understanding of politics in this country.
Chuck said...Respectfully, I don't think that "it is down to" spelling and typos. "Spelling and typos" is a WaPo story. It isn't the only story, not the last story
--
Respecfully, thanks for that clarification...
ARM, I tried to tell you who controls the House and Senate but you ignore me, which makes me sad.
Mark Twain, in much simpler times before The Great Society, which will kill off this country, said "No man's life, liberty or property is safe when Congress is in session."
The present political order in this country will not survive The Great Society.
Democrats use arguments as they seem to apply. If times are good, the GOP is starving the poor. If times are poor, the GOP is starving the poor.
See how that works?
Raising taxes is always good. Cutting spending is always bad.
Right now, Congress is busy raising spending.
Like ARM, I'm worried about the deficit. We have a spending problem. As ARM also notes, we don't at the moment have a revenue problem. I used to think these were interrelated: your spending and your revenue should inform one another. That's how solvent households and firms work. It's not how government works. Sometimes we have revenue problems, sometimes we don't. We always have spending problems. It's possible there's no way to resolve the spending problem in our current form of government. There's no incentive for political leaders to do so. The only discipline that matters with spending is whether there is access to money to pay the bills. The spending problem will be addressed when checks stop going out to people, and it will be addressed seriously when the people expecting that money are large enough in number and influence to make a difference.
It will not kvetching about the budget that resolves our spending problem. It will be when what's happening in Illinois spreads to other states and gets worse. In the meantime, I hope that we spend on things that are useful after that collapse. I think that's about the best you can do if you're concerned about the deficit: hope that the spending is on things that will have some value while we rebuild our finances.
Progress.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
"Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof. I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now."
Perhaps because the commenters here don't argue with fascists? Just a thought.
On topic.
Trump will send Ryans budget back to congress.
ARM: Again, a claim was made regarding my beliefs without any proof.
Just like the claim you made regarding the beliefs of other posters here without any proof.
I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.
IOW, you're still making claims about the beliefs of other posters here without providing any proof about the beliefs of other posters here.
P.S. Reposting the same meandering, illogical shit repeatedly won't magically transform it into a good argument.
It is worthwhile trying to understand how our governors believe they are going to pay off the deficit - through growth, which will make the debt smaller or at least manageable relative to the size of the economy. This is why there is never going to be any serious restrictions on immigration. The only way to grow the economy is through population growth or increases in productivity. Only a tiny part of the government's spending is invested in R&D so it is unlikely that productivity increases will be sufficient. That leaves population growth.
Angle-Dyne, Angelic Buzzard said...
Just like the claim you made regarding the beliefs of other posters here without any proof.
No, fundamentally different. No statement has been attributed to me in which I laud deficits, can't get enough of them, or in any other way suggest that the bigger the deficit the better. Nor have I ever compared deficits to mother's milk or apple pie.
In contrast, many here, possibly a majority, have identified with a group nominally devoted to deficit reduction, yet remain silent in the face of indefensible deficit increases.
"It's possible there's no way to resolve the spending problem in our current form of government. There's no incentive for political leaders to do so."
It is time for a balanced budget amendment
See Convention of States Project
" This is why there is never going to be any serious restrictions on immigration. The only way to grow the economy is through population growth or increases in productivity."
Yes, importing millions of illiterate peasants will work fine at growing the economy.
Do you think about this or just repost DNC talking points ?
What are the numbers on how many new "immigrants" are on welfare ? Of course, those numbers are not available.
You can always tell a Democrat because he/she is the one who thinks a 100% tax rate would bring in lots of revenue.
Why are they blaming Trump? Blame schools for not teaching spelling-- relying on the lazy person's answer-- phonetic spelling and spell check-- so many correctly spelled words-- just not the right word.
Does anyone proof read their work anymore?
How about insisting on spending cuts before tax cuts. - ARM the Fiscal Hawk
Sure. List 'em.
The hammer is coming and it will leave a mark.
The entire time mueller has had key anti trump people under his thumb accomplishing little, Jeff Sessions & OIG Horowitz have been documenting the coup & building criminal cases.
31. Andrew McCabe was permitted a lawyer bc he's almost certainly under indictment; Horowitz has a prosecutor & a grand jury empaneled. The way OPR handled McCabe proves it.
32. Sit back and watch: these media attacks are the death throes of this conspiracy. Breaking McCabe was the beginning. This is well under way.
It will be fun but we might run out of popcorn.
“I, on the other hand, point to the well-documented opposition of the Tea Party to the deficits during the Great Recession, and the equally clear lack of a similar response to similar sized deficits during relatively good economic conditions right now.”
They’re still trying to get their applications through the IRS.
All those typos are basically a linguistic holocaust, so he's still Hitler.
"Democracy Dies In Dankness."
RE: tax cuts -- yes, increased deficit spending isn't great. But my bigger issue with these tax cuts (and basically all tax cuts that have ever passed during my lifetime) is that with every tax cut, the political necessity of giving a tax cut to the middle class has increased our dependence on high income earners. That, in turn, increases the volatility of our tax receipts, which I think tends to encourage wasteful spending in boom years that we then have to borrow to sustain as soon as the boom ends (because even just cutting the rate of increase in spending on any government program would be absolutely unthinkable -- it's the thin end of the wedge! Next they'll be throwing old people off cliffs).
Sarcasm aside, look at our receipts between 2008 and 2009. Individual income tax drops by $200 billion ($1.14 trillion to $915 billion) between 2008 and 2009. Meanwhile, FICA receipts drop by only $10 million ($900 billion down to $890 billion). True, FICA continues to drop in 2010 and 2011 (probably because people continued to lose their jobs), but even at its nadir ($818 billion in 2011), the decline is less than $100 billion. And that's what you'd expect -- the FICA tax base is much more stable because it taxes everyone equally (up to your first $120K or so of income).
For what it's worth, corporate taxes are even more volatile than individual income taxes, in percentage terms (between 2007 and 2009, they drop from $370 billion to $138 billion, or over 60%), but even there, they're a much smaller contributor to the federal government's overall tax receipts, and a smaller net contributor to tax receipt volatility.
Deficits and the debt isn't a problem as long as interest rates remain low, and there's no reason to think they won't remain low.
The government's deficit is the private sector's surplus. If the federal gov spends 100 and only taxes back 90, that's 10 more out there in the private sector economy to be used by people like us. A growing economy requires a growing money supply.
And you believe that this can go on forever?
ARM: "And you believe that this can go on forever?"
That which is unsustainable cannot be sustained.
If interest rates were going up quickly (they aren't), or we were at full employment (we aren't anywhere near), or wages were going up rapidly (they aren't), then running big deficits would begin to matter.
Don't think even for a second that the federal government needs to be run like a household. A balanced budget would throw us into a huge depression.
One reason I ended my subscription last month. I just couldn't take the anti Trump stance. In regard to the Jeff Bezos buyout of the Post in the above section, I think it has changed the WaPo. They've always been leftist, but I have counted as many as 15 anti-Trump headlines on the online front page. It gets boring. Why bother to pay my monthly fee to get opinion news and no factual news.
Of course, the paper Jeff Bezos owns is going to take the liberal techies views and run with them.
"a revenue problem"
It's not revenue. It's taxation. There's a difference.
Post a Comment