Posted on 08/16/2023 6:33:52 AM PDT by cymbeline
See Jul '23 in the excel sheet, Figure 2 and other tabs
I should have said to go to “July 2023, EXCEL”. It downloads the sheet that you have to view in your download directory. The download takes several seconds so be patient. Figure 2 is worth a look.
As a retired software engineer who's been pounding keyboards since 1990, I find this hilarious when reflecting on how it used to be. :)
Thank God for progress, right?
This is a manifestation of the failure of Capitalism.
GDP is always reported as a % growth number, but the raw amount in trillions is available if you dig for it.
Govt deficits are by their nature “stimulus”. If you compare deficit to GDP increase amount (not %, amount) you will discover the dirty little secret of the failure of capitalism.
GDP increase is LESS than the annual deficit. Capitalism isn’t displaying the effect of “priming the pump”. No. It is eating the stimulus. Eroding it.
And to make it all worse, GDP is a parameter that has G in its equation. Government spending. It’s not stimulus. It’s mathematical addition.
If tax revenue is down, then we are in a recession. You have to factor out recycled tax dollars that show up as revenue … like paying worthless, lazy ass government employees that build NOTHING, but supposedly pay taxes. Their taxes and take home pay is paid by people who build stuff.
“Thank God for progress, right?”
In numerous areas I think we’ve progressed far enough.
“Govt deficits are by their nature “stimulus”. “
You can spend money, borrowed or not, and get a return-on-investment, or you can throw it away.
I’m not an economist but why are deficits by their nature “stimulus”? Perhaps by their intent, but not by their nature.
“I’m not an economist but why are deficits by their nature “stimulus”? Perhaps by their intent, but not by their nature.”
Their nature is arithmetic. GDP has several formulas that define it. You’ll have to spend time with the wiki, but in a general way taxes wind up reducing consumption. Therefore the net increase of G vs the eroding of consumption via taxation means the arithmetic increase in GDP will be positive as a result of deficit.
There is also huge bill for Education and Net Interest.
Both bigger than the Defense.
“but in a general way taxes wind up reducing consumption.”
And consumption is a driver of GDP, correct? I see what you’re saying but increasing GTP by borrowing rather than taxing is flimsy.
>
In 2023 to-date the Federal Government has taken in 3.689 trillion and spent 5.302 trillion, thus increasing the national debt by 1.613 trillion. Figure 2 shows clearly where the money is coming from and going. About half of our expenditures are for Social Security, Health and Income Security.
>
...adding to the $200T+ in the ‘unfunded liabilities’ column, as ALL illegal, unconst., Ponzi schemes are BROKE from day 1.
“adding to the $200T+ in the ‘unfunded liabilities’ column,”
Wow! Hadn’t thought of that. An invisible column on the chart!
>
“adding to the $200T+ in the ‘unfunded liabilities’ column,”
Wow! Hadn’t thought of that. An invisible column on the chart!
>
Wait ‘til you see what they ‘keep off the books’ when govt “calculates” inflation, GDP, unemployment, etc. /s
“Wait ‘til you see what they ‘keep off the books’”
I didn’t do the post you replied to but I, like you, don’t trust ‘the books’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.