Comments about ‘US on track for narrowest budget gap since 2008’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, May 12 2014 8:48 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

OK, right wingers, blame Obama for this!

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

It's too bad that taxes for the highest earners aren't back at pre-Reagan levels.

Instead of having just relatively low deficits, we might be able to actually balance the budget.

When Reagan lowered taxes for high earners, yearly budgets exploded, and Reagan TRIPLED the debt on his watch.

After Clinton raised taxes again for high earners, we had budget surpluses.

And then of course GW lowered taxes again for high earners, and he more than DOUBLED the debt again; and we had GW's Great Recession.

We're still struggling with too little revenue because Republicans insist on keeping taxes far too low for the highest earners, even though spending cuts, including cuts to needed services, have greatly reduced expenses.

Interesting correlations, aren't they?

David
Centerville, UT

Does this not prove that Washington has a spending problem? When Congress can decrease spending, deficits shrink.

"Revenue has been boosted by a stronger economy, which means more people working and paying taxes, thereby reducing the deficit."

Does this statement from the article not validate the Republican economic theories? Have a low, but fair, business tax to increase economic activity, which leads to more employment, which leads to more revenue in the treasury.

However, it is broadly recognized that our current economy is actually moving along sluggishly. Imagine what would happen to federal deficits if the economy was more in alignment with historical norms.

Raising taxes hurts the middle class, it hurts entrepreneurs, it hurts small business, it hurts those seeking jobs, it hurts the economy, it hurts the treasury.

BTW, GaryO, Clinton benefited from welfare reform (led by Republicans) decreasing spending, and a roaring dot.com stock market that brought in higher than expected revenue in taxes. But it all ended in the late 90's with the stock crash.

History proves Reagan and Republicans are right.

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

David -

"History proves Reagan and Republicans are right."

WRONG

History proves that Reagan may have been the worst President of the 20th century.

We've been following his trickle down economics strategy for 30 years (except during the Clinton years), and what has it gotten us?

It's time to cut Reagan's toxic policies right out of the works. We should just hit the undo button on that one, and put this nation back on a sensible course with sensible taxes and reasonable revenue.

Being an apologist for past Republican fiscal and monetary policy must be exhaustively frustrating.

Kings Court
Alpine, UT

Thanks a lot, Obama. This is all your fault!

Kings Court
Alpine, UT

"History proves Reagan and the Republicans were right."

We never used to run these types of deficits until Reagan took office, and I remember how exorbitant, debated, and costly those deficits were, but he felt government spending was needed to stimulate economic activity. Also, Reagan raised taxes several times. He did a lot of great things, mostly by bringing confidence and a positive attitude back to your country, but make no mistake, runaway government spending started under Reagan and has continued ever since. That is one of his lasting legacies for sure.

We have small upticks in the economy and that is cause for celebration, but the pressures downward are much greater. Our economy is based on consumerism which is a mainstay of capitalism, but our main consumers (those who spend money) have been seeing their real incomes remain flat or lower since 1974. Our economic malaise is due to this fact. As long as income inequality of this magnitude remains a constant force, our economy will continue to get worse and worse over the long run. If people don't have money to spend, jobs are lost, tax revenue declines, etc, etc.

GaryO
Virginia Beach, VA

Kings Court -

"Reagan . . . did a lot of great things, mostly by bringing confidence and a positive attitude back to your country . . ."

Not really, Reagan just happened to be in office when those things happened.

Renewed confidence and a positive attitude came about because of the economic rebound, and the economic rebound was directly due to the fact that the price of world oil plummeted to less than 1/3 the price it had been during the Carter administration.

NOTHING stimulates the economy like cheap energy. Back then oil was the king of kings in energy sources. Coal, natural gas, and other sources were not nearly as available back then, so when oil spiked to an all-time high price during the Carter administration, the economy skidded to a stop. When the price of oil plummeted to such an extent during Reagan's administration, the economy rebounded. Reagan just went along for the ride.

By exchanging favors and promising to sign pork barrel bills, Reagan did convince members of Congress to finance his great big, hugely expensive, and ultimately worthless Star Wars play set though.

Reagan was an absolutely horrible president.

Say No to BO
Mapleton, UT

Some suggest raising taxes on the wealthy.
They are already paying far more than you and I.
But at the core of it all is the philosophy that THEIR money belongs to US in the first place. How do we get to that non sequitur?
Now, if you want to talk about corporations escaping taxes, I'm with you.
But you lose me when you start talking about government capping compensation and raising taxes on those who are millionaires.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

It helps having a GOP house to keep some control on BO’s profligate spending.

GaryO,
The last time the budget actually ran a surplus, the last time gross federal debt decreased was in 1969. Slick willey’s supposed surplus? Nope, the treasury was still borrowing form the SS trust fund, but there was enough surplus in SS receipts to more than covere the treasury’s deficit. Remember, slick had a GOP house then and he wanted to spend more than they did – he shut the government down twice because they would not spend as much as he wanted.

Thank you, though for no longer saying we are giving to the wealthy – recognize we are still TAKING more from them than from anyone else.

Being an apologist for dem fiscal and monetary policy must be exhaustively frustrating.

Worst president of the 20th century? Hands down it was carter.

Mark B
Eureka, CA

Harding, Coolidge and Nixon were all 20th century presidents who underperformed. Hoover had some great moments, but they all happened either before or after he was president. And yes, he took unfair blame for the Great Depression. Carter's deficits were small and he had a habit seldom seen in Washington - NOT lying. He was also our most devout president, and was hated for it. Now he's a punching bag for those who've remade Reagan in their own image.

Badger55
Nibley, Ut

Obama has proposed spending that would have added over $1Trillion to the deficit(the main two are the $447B jobs bill in 2011; $302B Transportation bill this year ). I wonder what the deficit would look like had these bills been passed. I guess it is a good thing that congress quit letting the credit card run wild after 2010. What could have changed? Congress denied the spending that Obama wanted. If it had been up to him, the deficit would still be above $1Trillion per year.

Where are all the people complaining that Congress wont say YES to Obama?

worf
Mcallen, TX

Eight trillion dollars added to the debt in just six years.

Hmm? That's about $200,000 for every second in a year.

Sorry folks, but this is not good leadership.

No president from the past can be an excuse for this.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments