GOP 2012 budget to make $4 trillion-plus in cuts

[Denny Crane]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/march-madness-feds-spent-more-eight-time

March Madness: U.S. Gov't Spent More Than Eight Times Its Monthly Revenue

During the month, according to the Treasury, the federal government grossed $194 billion in tax revenue and paid out $65.898 billion in tax refunds (including $62.011 to individuals and $3.887 to businesses) thus netting $128.179 billion in tax revenue for March.

At the same, the Treasury paid out a total of $1.1187 trillion. When the $65.898 billion in tax refunds is deducted from that, the Treasury paid a net of $1.0528 trillion in federal expenses for March.

 

[barfo]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/march-madness-feds-spent-more-eight-time

March Madness: U.S. Gov't Spent More Than Eight Times Its Monthly Revenue

During the month, according to the Treasury, the federal government grossed $194 billion in tax revenue and paid out $65.898 billion in tax refunds (including $62.011 to individuals and $3.887 to businesses) thus netting $128.179 billion in tax revenue for March.

At the same, the Treasury paid out a total of $1.1187 trillion. When the $65.898 billion in tax refunds is deducted from that, the Treasury paid a net of $1.0528 trillion in federal expenses for March.

Uh, no. That writer was apparently too focused on grinding his axe or whatever, and didn't read the financial statements very carefully at all.

Hell, you don't even have to look at the source material to know this is bullshit. You yourself have been saying $3.6T budget, $3.6T budget. So how could we have spent $1.1T in a single month?

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

Uh, no. That writer was apparently too focused on grinding his axe or whatever, and didn't read the financial statements very carefully at all.

Hell, you don't even have to look at the source material to know this is bullshit. You yourself have been saying $3.6T budget, $3.6T budget. So how could we have spent $1.1T in a single month?

barfo

I was going to start a thread about interpolation, but this is a good opportunity to broach the topic.

Why on earth do you think the govt. spends $3.6T/12 every month? This is interpolation, and it's a huge assumption.

It could spend $3.6T in month 1 and $0 in each succeeding month. At least in theory. That's the extreme opposite of interpolation.

The govt. WWW site works about as good as the govt as a whole. When I click on the link to see the financial statement, I get:

Internal Server Error

The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

Please contact the server administrator, service.desk@fms.treas.gov and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

 

[barfo]

I was going to start a thread about interpolation, but this is a good opportunity to broach the topic.

Why on earth do you think the govt. spends $3.6T/12 every month? This is interpolation, and it's a huge assumption.

That's not any definition of the word interpolation that I am familiar with.

It could spend $3.6T in month 1 and $0 in each succeeding month. At least in theory.

Yes, in theory it could. But that's about as useful in the real world as any other theory presented here. Reality says otherwise.
What does the government spend money on? You know the answer to that, right? Well, then it should be easy to see why the payments are spread out over the course of the year.

Sure, the government could pay everyone's annual social security and medicare on January 1. But they don't.

That's the extreme opposite of interpolation.

I'm skeptical about your use of the word interpolation.

The govt. WWW site works about as good as the govt as a whole. When I click on the link to see the financial statement, I get:

Worked fine for me. Maybe I broke it.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpolation

In the mathematical subfield of numerical analysis, interpolation is a method of constructing new data points within the range of a discrete set of known data points.

In engineering and science one often has a number of data points, as obtained by sampling or experimentation, and tries to construct a function which closely fits those data points. This is called curve fitting or regression analysis. Interpolation is a specific case of curve fitting, in which the function must go exactly through the data points.

(You are constructing new data points between Jan 1 when the govt. has spent $0 through Dec. 31 when the govt. has spent all $3.6T by assuming $3.6T/12 is spent each month. the sample would be the start and end points, you really don't know enough about the in between points to say it's linear. Like the govt. spent $1.1T of that $3.6T in March. The article clearly states an exception to your faulty assumption - it spent $65B on tax refunds, which do bunch up in the first few months of the year).

 

[MARIS61]

I would love to know what tax bracket you are in. 50% of the population doesn't pay federal income tax... not surprising so many are in favor of increasing taxes because they have no idea what it is like to actually pay taxes.

That's because they have never been fortunate enough to be given the opportunity.

Roughly 33% of Americans are unemployed against their wishes (actual numbers, not just those getting unemployment insurance), another 33% are unemployable due to handicaps or chronic/terminal illness, and of the 33% with jobs only the very top tier of income manages to avoid paying taxes.

If you can make up numbers, so can I. I've never met anyone who never paid taxes and I'm sure you haven't either. It's absurd to even suggest that it's a possibility.

Everyone pays taxes on gasoline, phone service, electric or gas service, property taxes (either on their home or in their rent), sales taxes in most states, lodging taxes when they travel, transportation taxes, tobacco tax, liquor tax...

Proportionally, the poorest of the poor pay the greatest percent of tax to income and the richest pay the least.

 

[barfo]

(You are constructing new data points between Jan 1 when the govt. has spent $0 through Dec. 31 when the govt. has spent all $3.6T by assuming $3.6T/12 is spent each month. the sample would be the start and end points, you really don't know enough about the in between points to say it's linear. Like the govt. spent $1.1T of that $3.6T in March. The article clearly states an exception to your faulty assumption - it spent $65B on tax refunds, which do bunch up in the first few months of the year).

Ok, I can see now how you were looking at it as being an interpolation.

And obviously, it is not absolutely, entirely, even spending throughout the year. But it isn't very different from that. As you know, $65 billion is less than 2% of the total.

And also quite obviously, the author is guilty of a gross, intentional misinterpretation of the data, which actually show that March was not a particularly unusual month.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

If you took 100% of GE's stock as taxes, we'd still have over a $1T deficit. Its market cap is a whopping $216B. The entire fortune 100 would be gone in a little over a decade to support govt. spending habits at its current rate of spending.

I don't see it as the panacea you do when I look at the numbers.

Like the joke about 20 dead lawyers, it's a start.

The best thing this country could do to revive the economy would be to exile it's 10000 richest citizens. Let them take their money and their political influence and GTFO. Better people will quickly fill the void with fresh ideas.

 

[barfo]

Denny, just in case it isn't clear:

Like the govt. spent $1.1T of that $3.6T in March.

That did not happen.

barfo

 

[MARIS61]

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/march-madness-feds-spent-more-eight-time

March Madness: U.S. Gov't Spent More Than Eight Times Its Monthly Revenue

During the month, according to the Treasury, the federal government grossed $194 billion in tax revenue and paid out $65.898 billion in tax refunds (including $62.011 to individuals and $3.887 to businesses) thus netting $128.179 billion in tax revenue for March.

At the same, the Treasury paid out a total of $1.1187 trillion. When the $65.898 billion in tax refunds is deducted from that, the Treasury paid a net of $1.0528 trillion in federal expenses for March.

I also have a lot of payouts this time of year, paying taxes, higher electric bill, extra laundry (long johns)...but i'll have more income and less payouts in the coming months.

It's pretty desperate to take one month out of 48 and try to use it as any kind of measurement.

 

[maxiep]

I applaud Rep. Ryan. It won't get us all the way there, but it changes the trajectory. I hope the Democrats and the old-line Republicans begin to recognize the reality of our fiscal situation and join the conversation in good faith. The only way to save our social safety net is to recraft it.

 

[barfo]

I also have a lot of payouts this time of year, paying taxes, higher electric bill, extra laundry (long johns)...but i'll have more income and less payouts in the coming months.

It's pretty desperate to take one month out of 48 and try to use it as any kind of measurement.

Especially when you have to lie outrageously about the numbers to make it look bad.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I applaud Rep. Ryan. It won't get us all the way there, but it changes the trajectory. I hope the Democrats and the old-line Republicans begin to recognize the reality of our fiscal situation and join the conversation in good faith. The only way to save our social safety net is to recraft it.

"It takes a village to destroy a village in order to save it."

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Barfo, I'm interested to know whether or not you feel we spend too much and what thoughts you have about how to handle the national debt.

 

[Denny Crane]

Ok, I can see now how you were looking at it as being an interpolation.

And obviously, it is not absolutely, entirely, even spending throughout the year. But it isn't very different from that. As you know, $65 billion is less than 2% of the total.

And also quite obviously, the author is guilty of a gross, intentional misinterpretation of the data, which actually show that March was not a particularly unusual month.

barfo

The article is factually correct.

Total Withdrawals (excluding transfers)
Today $179,784
Month to date (all of March) $1,118,662
(Year to date) $5,835,757

 

[barfo]

The article is factually correct.

Total Withdrawals (excluding transfers)
Today $179,784
Month to date (all of March) $1,118,662
(Year to date) $5,835,757

And yet he, and now you, fail to state the total deposits. Why is that, Denny? Is it because that completely blows the whole story line you are pushing? Are you that dishonest?

Total deposits (excluding transfers):
Today: 231,607
March: 1,046,105
YTD: 5,643,979

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

That's because they have never been fortunate enough to be given the opportunity.

Roughly 33% of Americans are unemployed against their wishes (actual numbers, not just those getting unemployment insurance), another 33% are unemployable due to handicaps or chronic/terminal illness, and of the 33% with jobs only the very top tier of income manages to avoid paying taxes.

If you can make up numbers, so can I. I've never met anyone who never paid taxes and I'm sure you haven't either. It's absurd to even suggest that it's a possibility.

Oh Maris... Never afraid to show your incredible ignorance.

In 2009, roughly 47% of households, or 71 million, will not owe any federal income tax, according to estimates by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.htm

 

[blazerboy30]

Especially when you have to lie outrageously about the numbers to make it look bad.

barfo

The funny and pathetic thing is that you think somebody has to lie to make the $1.5 Trillion deficit and $14.5 Trillion debt "look bad".

 

[barfo]

The funny and pathetic thing is that you think somebody has to lie to make the $1.5 Trillion deficit and $14.5 Trillion debt "look bad".

No, the funny thing is that people do lie in order to make the deficit and debt look worse. And the article Denny quoted is evidence of that.

barfo

 

[barfo]

Barfo, I'm interested to know whether or not you feel we spend too much and what thoughts you have about how to handle the national debt.

I think we need to get our long-term spending under control, but I don't think the sky is falling. We've got time to work it out. Which is good, because our system of government isn't fast.

I expect we'll handle it the way we've always handled it - congress will decide how much to spend and how much to tax, and we the voters will re-elect them, or not, depending on how we feel, and we'll elect presidents who may or may not take leadership roles on the subject.

Unless, of course, the teapartiers actually decide to have a revolution when they don't get their way, and then we'll have a civil war.

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

No, the funny thing is that people do lie in order to make the deficit and debt look worse.

I never said anything to the contrary.

You said people had to lie to make the numbers look "bad"... which is absurd.

 

[barfo]

I never said anything to the contrary.

You said people had to lie to make the numbers look "bad"... which is absurd.

Right, I see what you mean. I didn't mean it the way you took it. For one thing, I was speaking specifically of the March numbers, not of the overall deficit or debt.

barfo

 

[maxiep]

It seems we have posters on this board that have no understanding of why the world allows us to issue $14T of debt. For those posters that believe that there is no sense of urgency, I would ask if they believe that we can continue to spend without consequence to our standing as the world's benchmark currency?

 

[barfo]

It seems we have posters on this board that have no understanding of why the world allows us to issue $14T of debt. For those posters that believe that there is no sense of urgency, I would ask if they believe that we can continue to spend without consequence to our standing as the world's benchmark currency?

We can't do anything without consequence. So, sure, continuing to borrow will have bad effects. Will we instantly collapse into chaos and dark ages if we don't do something right this very minute? Maybe, but it seems rather unlikely.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

No, the funny thing is that people do lie in order to make the deficit and debt look worse. And the article Denny quoted is evidence of that.

barfo

There's no lie in the article.

If we were running a surplus, the cash in would be $200B and cash out would be $190B (or whatever). The cash out being $1.18T is a indication of the sheer massiveness of the debt. A balanced budget would be $200B in $200B out. Those aren't numbers that are out = 5x in

If you want to consider the other sources of income, it was selling $750B of debt instruments. That's charging $750B on new credit cards to pay off the balances on $500B of old credit cards.

 

[BrianFromWA]

I think the truth is somewhere b/w barfo and Denny's positions.

The government (at least, DoD) is not a constant-slope spend line. Even something as mundane as officer promotions (when you actually start getting paid) are staggered so that there's little spent early in the FY, and the bulk spent late. Same with training expenditures and moves due to orders.

So it's certainly feasible that the gov't spent 1.1T or whatever in March, while "only" taking in 120B or whatever. But if you were to write the article in, say, June, it might be a lot closer--like 250B coming in (our intakes are 2.1T a year--it's gotta come in sometime) and 200B going out.

So I think there's a bit of hyperbole to say "we're spending 8x our intakes!!" like the author suggests. It may be that he's factually correct, but the analysis of it (8x!!) is a bit faulty. That's like me (who gets paid bi-weekly) saying "I've spent $50 on groceries and $100 on gas filling up the tank this week...but I didn't bring in a dime in income! I'm on the road to ruin!" Nevermind that I'll get paid a full paycheck next week, and I did last week.

3.7T budgeted to go out vs. 2.1T budgeted to come in is bad enough w/o resorting to hyperbole, imho.

 

[Denny Crane]

I think the truth is somewhere b/w barfo and Denny's positions.

The government (at least, DoD) is not a constant-slope spend line. Even something as mundane as officer promotions (when you actually start getting paid) are staggered so that there's little spent early in the FY, and the bulk spent late. Same with training expenditures and moves due to orders.

So it's certainly feasible that the gov't spent 1.1T or whatever in March, while "only" taking in 120B or whatever. But if you were to write the article in, say, June, it might be a lot closer--like 250B coming in (our intakes are 2.1T a year--it's gotta come in sometime) and 200B going out.

So I think there's a bit of hyperbole to say "we're spending 8x our intakes!!" like the author suggests. It may be that he's factually correct, but the analysis of it (8x!!) is a bit faulty. That's like me (who gets paid bi-weekly) saying "I've spent $50 on groceries and $100 on gas filling up the tank this week...but I didn't bring in a dime in income! I'm on the road to ruin!" Nevermind that I'll get paid a full paycheck next week, and I did last week.

3.7T budgeted to go out vs. 2.1T budgeted to come in is bad enough w/o resorting to hyperbole, imho.

The document in question is a cash flow statement. The revenues were truly 1/8th what the govt. spent. A cash flow statement also shows cash from investments and selling equity and from borrowing money.

To put these numbers into perspective, all of GDP is $14T, and govt. is spending $1.2Tx12=$14.4T. The $750B it borrowed in just one month would pay for nearly all of Social Security benefits for the year.

It's not like spending $50 on groceries and $100 on gas between paychecks. It's like getting a paycheck of $100 and spending $50 on groceries and $100 on gas and charging $800 on a credit card to pay off the balance on an old card.

And a more apropos analogy would be a $50 paycheck and spending $200 going to the movies and out to the bars.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

We can't do anything without consequence. So, sure, continuing to borrow will have bad effects. Will we instantly collapse into chaos and dark ages if we don't do something right this very minute? Maybe, but it seems rather unlikely.

barfo

But whether it does or does not, we should be doing whatever we can to lessen those consequences now. And that is my thinking. Why wait until the consequences hit and then see if we can live with them? Not that you advocated that, but we have a responsibility to act.

 

[barfo]

There's no lie in the article.

If we were running a surplus, the cash in would be $200B and cash out would be $190B (or whatever). The cash out being $1.18T is a indication of the sheer massiveness of the debt. A balanced budget would be $200B in $200B out. Those aren't numbers that are out = 5x in

If you want to consider the other sources of income, it was selling $750B of debt instruments. That's charging $750B on new credit cards to pay off the balances on $500B of old credit cards.

Sigh. If I give you $1 and Brian gives me $1, what is my cashflow?

I can't believe you are clinging to this dishonest position. The government had $1T in cash out, and $1T in cash in. It's simply a lie to pretend that we spent 5x as much as we took in.

Pretending that paying off debt counts as cash out but borrowing doesn't count as cash in is absurd.

And you know perfectly well that the government buys and sells huge amounts of debt every single month. There isn't anything unusual about this at all.

barfo

 

[barfo]

I think the truth is somewhere b/w barfo and Denny's positions.

The government (at least, DoD) is not a constant-slope spend line. Even something as mundane as officer promotions (when you actually start getting paid) are staggered so that there's little spent early in the FY, and the bulk spent late. Same with training expenditures and moves due to orders.

So it's certainly feasible that the gov't spent 1.1T or whatever in March, while "only" taking in 120B or whatever.

It's feasible in theory, but the point is it didn't happen in reality.

barfo