ParrotHead Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 Of coruse it all depends on who you listen to. When it comes to the economy and/or economics, I tend to listen to those that make it their living or have been formally educated in such. But of course you can always listen to some crackpot leftist with a socialist agenda...... http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0221/p01s03-usec.html Despite the ongoing costs of US military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan, the outlook for the federal budget has grown substantially brighter. Tax revenues are rising much faster than spending, according to Treasury Department numbers released last week. The recent trend is strong enough that, were it to continue, the budget could move into surplus in barely a year, one economist calculates. Already, the federal deficit is shrinking toward about half the size that it has averaged since 1970, when analyzed as a percentage of gross domestic product. The shift reflects a strong economy, with higher incomes and corporate profits generating a bigger flow of tax revenue. In turn, the Treasury's progress could help the economy by buoying investor confidence in the nation's fiscal position. Although it is a welcome change, the improvement does little to stave off the long-run challenges to the nation's financial health, many economists say. Baby boomers are starting to retire, placing new demands on government. Costs for healthcare programs like Medicare are still projected to rise faster than overall inflation. "The picture is getting brighter," and if there's no recession over the next several years "there are going to continue to be some good strides made," says Mark McMullen, a senior economist at Moody's Economy.com in West Chester, Pa. But "it's unlikely that we're going to see a balanced budget anytime in the near or long term." Now for the whole story you can read the article – the link is provided but it’s simple folks. You can reduce a deficit 2 ways and 2 ways only. You can tax the people to death and pay off your loans or you can give them more money to spend. Simple economics here folks, if you have more to spend then the majority of you are going to spend it. This spending generates revenues for businesses, increased business and increased employment. The effect of all of this is higher earnings and higher tax revenues from those earnings. For all you folks that got bent out of shape about higher earnings in the oil industry, think about what you would be paying if the earnings weren’t high and think about the amount of taxes that was generated from these higher earnings. Taxes that you didn’t have to pay. Now think about what Hillary said, she wants to “take” these earnings and spend them in a manner only a Clinton can think of. You want to get screwed at the pump and by the government then go ahead, vote for a democrat and get ready to feel the love. Oh and before some of you start to spew your socialistic rhetoric about how everyone would be much better off on some sort of governmental handout program - save your breath because I don't subscribe to idiotic notions that the government creates healthy economies. People with money to spend create a healthy economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldksnarc Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Re: Good news for a change [ QUOTE ] and if there's no recession over the next several years [/ QUOTE ] Elect more democrats and a dem as President and see how fast we go into recession. Economy went down the crapper during Carter. Reagan and Bush #1 brought it back so well it took nearly eight years under Clinton and even Clinton #1 couldn't screw it totally up until the end of his term. Bush #2 inherited an economy going into if not in recession. His tax cuts brought it out and now we have record-breaking stock market and an ever-decreasing deficit - even with the billions in military build-up and funding the war. Stock markets recent problems are simply a cautionary adjustment for all the rapid growth. Sorry, but I like the way things are now more than a few years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevebeilgard Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Re: Good news for a change yep. sure is bad news for democrats Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strut10 Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Re: Good news for a change [ QUOTE ] Bush #2 inherited an economy going into if not in recession. His tax cuts brought it out and now we have record-breaking stock market and an ever-decreasing deficit - even with the billions in military build-up and funding the war. [/ QUOTE ] Yes. And now the democrats have promised to change this for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.