Been gone for awhile.....

[S.A. Boggs]

TPP? I don't know enough about international trade to make an educated guess.....but, played right, you leave then come back in to negotiate a better deal.

Who is doing an unbiased cost/benefit analysis of TPP. What is the potential for the first year, 5 year, 10 year and so forth. If the percentile is not 60%+ why should the U.S. be a party to it?
Sam

[RED]

Well Red throws a lot of stuff out there, so if you're going to score him, bring a spare #2 pencil and extra paper. One thing I'm watching right now is his claim, based on 12 semesters or years or whatever of Economics classes, that the tax cut is going to cause the budget deficit to come tumbling down by virtue of all of the additional economic activity. Right now the CBO is disagreeing with Red, but fluctuations are known to happen.

Saying things would not be to the liking of folks here if HRC was the President is hardly the bold prediction of a True Visionary either. Although in one of those strange mirages that sometimes happens in smoke clouds, rumor is that Trump has directed his people to go back and look at TPP. Love to hear Red explain why that is good/bad.

There you go again with your lies. I have never said a tax cut will cause the deficit t come down,,, NEVER NOT ONE TIME!!!!!!!! What I said was that a tax cut will increase tax revenues. The deficit is a whole 'nother subject. Reagan reduced taxes and tax revenue skyrocketed but so did spending. Do you really think that increasing taxes is going to reduce the deficit? Trump's tax cut caused tax revenues to increase and the Congress backed him into a corner and he signed a huge spending increase that is even higher than the all time tax revenue that is being collected... If you have credit card debt you need to pay off, and get a nice raise at work and you go out and increase your credit card spending, you'll never get out of debt.

Quit lying and making stuff up.

[RED]

Well Red throws a lot of stuff out there, so if you're going to score him, bring a spare #2 pencil and extra paper. One thing I'm watching right now is his claim, based on 12 semesters or years or whatever of Economics classes, that the tax cut is going to cause the budget deficit to come tumbling down by virtue of all of the additional economic activity. Right now the CBO is disagreeing with Red, but fluctuations are known to happen.

Saying things would not be to the liking of folks here if HRC was the President is hardly the bold prediction of a True Visionary either. Although in one of those strange mirages that sometimes happens in smoke clouds, rumor is that Trump has directed his people to go back and look at TPP. Love to hear Red explain why that is good/bad.

There you go again with your lies. I have never said a tax cut will cause the deficit t come down,,, NEVER NOT ONE TIME!!!!!!!! What I said was that a tax cut will increase tax revenues. The deficit is a whole 'nother subject. Reagan reduced taxes and tax revenue skyrocketed but so did spending. Do you really think that increasing taxes is going to reduce the deficit? Trump's tax cut caused tax revenues to increase and the Congress backed him into a corner and he signed a huge spending increase that is even higher than the all time tax revenue that is being collected... If you have credit card debt you need to pay off, and get a nice raise at work and you go out and increase your credit card spending, you'll never get out of debt.

Over spending is the cause of the deficit... stop increasing spending and increase the revenues will work ever time it's tried.

Quit lying and making stuff up.

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/feds-collect-record-individual-income-taxes-through-march-still-run

[togor]

Red if they reduce the tax rate to zero, will revenues continue to go up? If not, then at what tax rate will revenues peak? How close are we to that point? Is there a chance that we have already passed it? How would we know if we had passed that point or not? And finally...what is the goal of taxation?

These are the questions that you are completely unprepared to consider. So I suggest you quit now.

POSTSCRIPT:

Your description of the deficit treats revenue as a given, fixed object, so consequently, shortfalls are purely on the expense side. Why? What justification is there for that? Congress controls both taps. As a great illustration of this, they passed a big tax cut, then followed it up with a big spending boost. It's the combination of the two that cause the deficit to start yawning wide open, just as the Chinese are starting to rethink their love affair with T-bills. If anything, the given is on the spending side, with existing commitments to entitlements, interest on the debt, etc. Discretionary spending makes up an ever-smaller slice of the pie every year.

If a truck leaves the blacktop by a good ways, and has to be winched out, but there isn't enough cable on the spool, then it's fair to say the answer is to get a bigger spool, not to wish the truck to be closer to the road. But the deficit is not like that.

[JB White]

TPP always meant toilet paper party. Halloween, homecoming, hell night... I see a need for a lot of TP here but it aint for partying.