Report: If Not for Republican Policies, the Federal Government Would Be Running a Surplus

[JudyM]

WASHINGTON, Oct. 15 – Following an announcement Monday from the Treasury that the federal government ran a deficit of $779 billion in Fiscal Year 2018, the Democratic staff on the Senate Budget Committee released a report showing that the federal government would be running a surplus today if not for four Republican policies.

Without the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enormous post-9/11 defense buildup and two rounds of costly, regressive tax cuts, the federal government would be running a $156 billion surplus instead of a $779 billion deficit. The Trump Tax Cuts – which coupled permanent corporate tax cuts with temporary individual tax cuts – added $164 billion to the 2018 deficit.

The Bush tax cuts contributed $488 billion to the deficit in FY 2018, the Trump tax cuts added $164 billion, the direct costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ran up $127 billion and base defense increases led to $156 billion in spending.

https://www.budget.senate.gov/ranking-member/newsroom/press/report-if-not-for-republican-policies-the-federal-government-would-be-running-a-surplus

We should broadcast these numbers widely...

[lapfog_1]

1. Don't forget the extra VA costs to care for the veterans from the war in Iraq

I will discount the war in Afghanistan as I think it was justified... up until we kill Bin Laden.

And then we should have occupied the country (with a massive military presence) and rebuilt it with modern schools, etc.

[Cosmocat]

9. Yep

agreed ...

[MyOwnPeace]

10. I had this sticker posted in my school:

"After we rebuild Iraq,
can we rebuild our own school?"

Still waiting..............................

[moondust]

2. Thank Bill Clinton.

1998:

“Well ahead of the most ambitious schedule, America has balanced the budget,” Clinton declared. “America can now turn off the deficit clock, long a sign of our leaders’ failure of will, and plug in the surplus clock, a symbol all Americans can look to with pride.”

Beside him, a large chart showed a $150 billion surplus projected through 2003.

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2018/06/22/Bill-Clinton-s-Surplus-Miracle-20-Years-Later

The surpluses were projected to retire the national debt in a decade or so.

Then came Bushco and Republicans so obsessed with passing tax cuts that they seemingly ignored everything else including some bad guys learning to fly airplanes into tall buildings. The rest is history.

[hvn_nbr_2]

8. Exactly. The entire national debt would be paid off years ago if not for Pukes. nt

[dalton99a]

22. +1

[Donkees]

3. 'McConnell wants to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid to pay for Republicans' ...

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[FakeNoose]

7. This bears repeating from time to time

[They_Live]

17. Thank you.

I was just thinking about that.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

4. it's the plan

The GOPer plan is to starve government, blame Democrats, and remove the ability of the Democratic Party to provide social programs such as education, infrastructure, health care, care for the elderly, and EPA. This has been the plan since at least Nixon.

[Duppers]

5. EXACTLY!

[Duppers]

6. Broadcasting these numbers might change

some independents' minds, but will not influence rethugs whatsoever. They dismiss any and all Dems' statements.

[JudyM]

18. If ever there was a time to make clear how much better/fairer we govern, it's now.

Some folks are taking a look at voting dem for the first time, and this gives them more solid reasons.

[Duppers]

19. I've been debating extending a conversation

With a woman I've not seen in 50yrs. She contacted me last week thru FB (which I've ghosted yrs ago). But curiosity got the best of me, so I made contact, after her request. 1st thing she said, "I'm a Republican, so will you still accept me as a FB friend?" She apparently had read the "about me" info where I stated I will not be friends with a Republican. (I should have also added religious people.)

I texted her a list of reasons repubs are terrible, especially TRump. She ignore it and went on to personal chi-chat which I returned where was able to brag, on purpose, and sent pics.

I've been debating for days now as to whether I should even try to engage her politically by asking her to defend her Republican voting/membership. She's 73, I'm 72 (soon). Or should I just kick her to the curb as I have every other childhood friend I've tried to engage? They are as stubbornly impossible as they are ignorant. I've tried with far too many including my brother and s.i.l. It has always come down to...

In my experience with southern repubs, any enlightening discussion is futile. Sorry. This has included by own mother. Decades ago I told her "facts don't matter to you, your mind is made up."

It might make a difference to other age groups and in other parts of the country.


Perhaps I should try one more time.

[JudyM]

20. The Sirens' call. We just keep thinking that if they understood the facts they'd get reasonable.

And then, the whooshing sound as they swipe the football away at the last second á la Charlie Brown’s Lucy.

[Scurrilous]

11. K&R

[rickford66]

12. Why are they referred to as "permanent" tax cuts ?

What makes them "permanent"? Is Roe v Wade permanent ?

[ProfessorGAC]

13. They're Not

Just requires congress to make them "unpermanent". It's not constitutional to pass a law that can't be reversed by a different congress.

[rickford66]

14. That was my point.

They're consistently referred to as "permanent" which isn't true. The media should refer to them as "temporary" tax cuts.

[ProfessorGAC]

15. They're Reporters

The r's called the biz cuts permanent and they are, IIRC, listed that way in the legislation, but that phrase in the bill is meaningless.

So, from a pure "non-partisan" reporting standpoint, it's an accurate description. It's a lie, but accurate.

[BeckyDem]

16. Recommend!

[CrispyQ]

21. Kick.