As the national debt hits $22 trillion, these are the only people trying to cut spending

The Washington Examiner ^ | February 15, 2019 | Jack Hunter

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The national debt hit $22 trillion this week. You won’t find many in either major party who think this is a healthy development.

But isn’t part of the reason people vote Republican because that party presents itself as fiscally responsible compared to Democrats?

For as long as the debt has grown, Republicans have been promising to stop it. Yet, in 1981 the national debt topped $1 trillion after former President Ronald Reagan’s first year. When former President George H.W. Bush left office in 1993, it was more than $4 trillion. His son, former President George W. Bush, would push it past $10 trillion.

Of course, Democrats were just as responsible for exploding the debt. President Barack Obama became the biggest government spender in world history, leaving office with an almost $20 trillion national debt.

That is, until our current Republican president outdid Obama in spending. When asked about a looming debt crisis in December, President Trump replied, “I won’t be here.” To his credit, Trump has shown some spending concerns, like his call for every agency to reduce operations by 5 percent in October.

But has anyone in Washington actually cut spending?

Yes, and not surprisingly they are all Republicans. Sadly, there’s only seven of them: Sens. Rand Paul R-Ky. and Mike Lee R-Utah, and Reps. Justin Amash R-Mich., Thomas Massie, R-Ky., John Duncan Jr. R-Tenn., Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, and Morgan Griffith, R-Va.

These findings are according to SpendingTracker.org, a project of the bipartisan nonprofit group the Coalition to Reduce Spending. SpendingTracker takes the annual votes of each member of Congress and measures how much is spent or cut through those votes, without exception. Amash was the biggest saver in Congress last year, voting to cut $165 billion in 2018.

But still, only seven?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Under Reagan federal tax receipts tripled.

In FY 1981, receipts were $599.272 billion.
In FY 1989, receipts were $991.104 billion.

[DoughtyOne]

Thank you. I’ve looked that up before, and I’m not sure exactly what the deal is. At one time I confirmed that receipts tripled. Not sure what I was referencing back then.

I can’t refute what you’ve found either.

[DoughtyOne]

I know what part of the problem is.

The stats I mentioned should have been, “They doubled under Reagan”, although that isn’t exactly right either. Looks like they went up about 50%.

At any rate, the spending in Congress went up even more.

As I recall the old standard was the spending went up triple while the receipts went up double.

Thanks for the correction.

[xzins]

Rand Paul is one of the few who get that the government is collecting all our data in order to use it against us. Rand Paul also gets the spending and interest payment crisis. Finally, he realizes that 18 years of war weakens a nation

[Pelham]

Part of that increase in tax receipts came from the deficit spending that continued during those years.

Deficit spending increases the ‘G’ in the GDP formula: C+G+I+Nx=GDP

The deficit spending wasn’t Reagan’s desire but it did occur.

[DoughtyOne]

He had a Democrat Congress for the most part.

To get military spending that we needed, he had to go along with spending they wanted too. Sadly...

[D Rider]

Most people do not remember. But two years into Reagan (1982) was the bottom of the Carter job market.

[Pelham]

“He had a Democrat Congress for the most part.”

And that really is why the deficits weren’t controlled.

Reagan’s economic proposal included $2 of spending cuts for every $1 in tax reductions.

Speaker Tip O’Neill agreed to it, and then reneged on the spending cuts. So the deficits not only continued, they grew.

The Reagan team never said that tax receipts would grow enough to cover the rate reductions.

What they did say is that economic growth would recoup a large portion of the receipts “lost” due to rate reductions.

Their projection was that around two thirds of each dollar would be recouped, and that prediction proved to be accurate.

[Pelham]

“Most people do not remember. But two years into Reagan (1982) was the bottom of the Carter job market.”

Fed Chairman Paul Volcker had monetary growth stopped dead until August of 1982. It’s why interest rates reached nearly 20%.

This was with Reagan’s approval, they both wanted to kill the inflationary expectations that had raged for a decade. And it worked better than anyone expected it would.

In August ‘82 the Fed relented and turned tap back on in the credit markets. The stock market roared to life and so did the American economy.

[DoughtyOne]

True. Reagan took on the nation in a bad economic situation.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks Pelham. I didn’t remember that part.

[zeestephen]

Re: “Federal tax receipts are going to skyrocket.”

Tax receipts in the first three months of FY 2019 are $771 billion.

Tax receipts in the first three months of FY 2018 were $770 billion.

Trump’s FY 2018 budget deficit was $779 billion.

Trump’s budget deficit in the first three months of FY 2019 is $319 billion.

Trump’s budget deficit in the first three months of FY 2018 was $225 billion.

Treasury Monthly Statement - December 2018
Table 1 - Page 5

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts1218.pdf

Treasury Monthly Statement - January 2019 - will be published on 05 March 2019.

[zeestephen]

Re: Under Reagan federal tax receipts tripled.

In FY 1981, receipts were $599.272 billion.

In FY 1989, receipts were $991.104 billion.

Tripled?

1989 would have to be $1.8 trillion for a triple.

Please remember that the inflation rate during that eight year period was 36.4%.

So, just to stay even with inflation, Reagan needed to collect $818 billion in 1989.

[LostPassword]

It comes down to property rights. Whether it’s taking more money from the people or devaluing money the we get to keep, it is our property that enables to the government to grow.

Are we going to chip away at that right slow like the Republicans want? Or eliminate it in one big step like AOC wants? Either way, nobody in DC seems to be concerned about our right to keep our property. Only about how much they can get away with taking and how they can explain it.

We need to stop talking about goals and methods. First get back to agreement on principles and rights.

[trebb]

Yep - and Trump knows that drastic cuts at this time would bring things to a screeching halt - something the folks who are “oh-so-concerned” are unwilling to see.

[Elsie]

Each one of us owes almost $220,000!!!

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

[Elsie]

Read ‘em and weep!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States

[Elsie]

The Federal Reserve issues routine reports on the flows and levels of debt in the United States.

As of the first quarter of 2010, the Federal Reserve estimated that total public and private debt owed

by American households, businesses, and government totaled $50 trillion,

or roughly $175,000 per American and 3.5 times GDP.^[13]

 

 

(From the link)

[central_va]

We have to stop both illegal and legal immigration, put up a a real 20% across the board import tariff and lower individual marginal tax rates. They only way out is ahead, it’d like D-day you have to go forward and grow out of this mess. Thinking far ahead once the baby boomers die off the SS problem will go away.

[Deplorable American1776]

I hope the 7 will increase 200 times soon...With the wall, the amount of people stealing services from us (illegals getting financial aid), should go down. We need another law. No money transfers unless 75% tax...$100 going to Mexico will be $175...