Trump and the GOP, over 10 years, are responsible for 30% of all the debt this nation haseveraccrued.
It’s safe to say we need to throw this fact in their lying faces every single time they try to use the debt as an excuse to starve children or cut cancer research.
The GOP are a failure. They have been hijacked by extremists who truly have no care for the fate of this nation if they can scurry off with more money than god.
They all need to go. Every single last one of them. And never allowed back until they clean house and get adults back in the room.
> It’s safe to say we need to throw this fact in their lying faces every single time they try to use the debt as an excuse to starve children or cut cancer research.
You can try, but it hasn't worked so far, so there's no reason to believe it will the next time.
They don't care and neither do their supporters.
You have to understand that hypocrisy works on you because you are logical and have shame. Neither applies to the MAGA crowd.
If Trump does it, it's good. If a Democrat does it, it's bad. Doesn't matter what it is.
The greatest threat to these people is if they are ignored and laughed at. “Oh you care about the debt, no you don’t, let’s move on with healthcare reform”.
They crave attention and legitimacy. Deny them both. Remind the people their words are worthless and it’s a waste of your energy to entertain them.
There's nothing wrong with trying, and I can't say that I've stopped either or I wouldn't keep talking about it, I just no longer expect it to do any good.
The billionaire class has its hooks into everything now. They are openly buying the president and distorting elections. They run all of the major media outlets.
IMO things are much more likely to get worse than better. Everyone needs to be really sober about this. I am not hoping for major problems in society but historically that has been what was required for major change to occur.
And the remaining 70% is at least half from Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the Bush tax cuts. So we are looking at the majority of the deficit being because of republican ls
Unfortunately, Democrats have repeatedly proven complicit by consistently whipping just enough votes to help Republicans pass their budgets. Every. Time.
“The House voted 218-214 to pass the Senate-amended bill on July 3, 2025.
218 Republicans voted yes.
212 Democrats voted no.
2 Republicans, Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), voted no.
The Senate voted 51-50 to pass the bill on July 1, 2025, with Vice President J.D. Vance (R) casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of the bill.
50 Republicans voted yes.
45 Democrats voted no.
Two independents who caucus with Democrats voted no.
Three Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Rand Paul(R-Ky.), voted no.
Vice President J.D. Vance (R) broke the tie in favor of passage.”
Federal spending is at about 23% of GDP. Defense is less than 4% of GDP. The vast majority of federal spending is already on social programs. Those absolutely need cut to bring yearly deficits down.
Really, and may I ask what they can realistically cut? Cut Social Security, which is people’s money, which is what they contributed to? Cut Medicare, again something people have already contributed to? So what exactly do you want to cut? The solution is to increase the taxes on the rich and remove FICA limits. Removing FICA limits itself will be a big part to solving the problem.
What waste is there with Social Security checks? What fraud are they talking about, how big is that, and where is the evidence? Same with Medicare… if there is fraud, then fix it, instead of derogatorily calling both of them as entitlements. They are both due entitlements… not handouts!
I understand, but we’re living alongside people that believe all entitlement programs are bad because they’re paid through taxes. Your average right wing Joe thinks they’re being significantly held back by these programs existing at all. It’s idiocy.
I would simply allow the automatic benefits cut to SS. I would cut all the welfare programs to zero. I would cut federal education spending to zero. I would reduce defense spending. I would eliminate refundable tax credits.
Increasing taxes on “the rich” doesn’t close the deficit. If tax increases are what you want, taxes would have to be increased across the board. I think people have a right to keep their own money. Obviously you disagree. How much of my money should you get?
You wouldn’t be able to do any of that because those are not serious proposals. I don’t need your money, but many people need our money, and that’s part of being in a society. It’s time to grow out of this idea of rugged individualism for all lol
You are free to give as much of your money to anyone you want. It’s yours, do what you wish with it. My objection is to you sending armed goons after me to take my money to give to others.
You can’t because there’s a very small percentage of people who’d vote for you in the first place.
Societies don’t function without social programs. Look around the world and through time. You’re stuck in a fantasy world with this idea of taxation = theft. It’s part of existing in a society, and that’s that
It isn’t an idea the “taxation=theft”, specifically income taxation. It is theft. Is it paid voluntarily?
And paying income taxation is part of existing in a society? You don’t even believe that. If you did, you would want massive tax increases on the lowest earners, being they don’t pay taxes in the first place.
You support social safety nets through progressive taxation and basic COL limits. Also, low earners still pay taxes like sales, payroll, and property taxes.
Mercatus is a right wing libertarian think tank funded by the Kock family. It is not some neutral, academic source, but one pushing a fucknuts viewpoint to entrench aristocracy in America. It’s beneath any thinking person’s reading level.
Cutting those things to zero would literally collapse the US and turn it into a third world country overnight. It's not a serious proposal, it's reddit shitposting.
Why would it collapse the U.S.? And just because the federal government ended these programs, there would be absolutely nothing preventing your state from providing them. You could have your own state raise its own taxes to provide these.
Yes, and I would argue that my state shouldn’t do any of these either. But if you wish to send your own states armed goons to take money from other people in your state, rather than on a national level, you do you.
So you’re going to repeat the 1780s again? We had to reproach our doctrine because one of the main issues was being able to conduct government duties fiscally. Getting rid of taxes is beyond ridiculous. Taxes are a necessity even if we don’t like paying them.
There are other ways to raise funds for the government other than income taxes. Also, it is only fairly recently that the government engaged in charity. Charity isn’t a federal duty.
Because so much consumer spending is driven by government transfers and so many jobs only exist because of this spending. Many Healthcare jobs also only exist because the government pays for peoples' healthcare.
I don’t get any of your money… so don’t go there, and I don’t need you for that. I have paid more taxes than what I will likely get back, anywhere near. Social Security has fully been paid into, so don’t talk about cutting it. Increasing taxes on rich needs to happen, as according to Warren Buffett himself thinks it is not quite fair.
Do you know how social security works? Because it really seems you do not.
And increasing taxes on anyone doesnt need to happen. Spending the last time there was a surplus was about 17.5% of GDP. I am more than happy to cap federal spending at that level.
And don’t appeal to authority. If Warren Buffet wanted to pay more to the government, there is absolutely nothing stopping him.
So you are going to teach me now how Social Security works… that is cute. What made you even say something silly like that?? Do you even know servicing our debt has become difficult, unless we collect more taxes? I guess you have no idea that it will only keep getting worse to the point that social benefit cuts will no longer be enough. Any party that talks about cutting either Medicare or Social Security will have no chance getting elected!
So you can’t explain why you made that silly statement in the first place, and then you keep repeating the same thing again… going in circles, are we… if ever increasing debt, at an astronomical rate, could simply be serviced by cutting spending, then you understand nothing. You can’t cut Social Security, which is fully paid by people… what part of something so simple do you not understand. You talk like an uncaring billionaire…are you that?
You could actually leave SS exactly as it is. SS is self funded. Other spending could absolutely be cut. Spending the last time there was a surplus was 17.5% of GDP. And was only 26 years ago. I am perfectly fine with going back to that level. Are you?
Don’t care what the specifics are. Reverse 30+ years of tax cuts.
Since the 1990s this entire economy has been a free for all for the corrupt and connected. They used to shoulder the higher tax burden, but shifted it on to us instead.
This nation, this society allowed you to become a billionaire. It’s time to give back.
Don’t bother with a linear or step scale. Once you cross $100M net worth your taxes should be exponentially scaled.
What do you mean you don’t care what the specifics are? Obviously you do care, or you wouldn’t be stating you want to go back to some other tax code. So tell me, was revenue higher? I’ll answer for you, since you don’t care. Revenue was not higher.
And the tax code has become more progressive, not less. High earners shoulder a bigger share of the taxes collected. This is indisputable fact.
Why are you so hostile to people keeping their own property? I have no problem with people keeping their own money, it is theirs.
Why are you so comfortable sending brownshirts against people you politically disfavor?
The national debt is truly a bipartisan issue. Yeah, Republicans drove it up with Iraq and tax cuts for the wealthy (2001, 2003, 2017, 2025). Democrats drove it up with the 2008 stimulus and post-COVID spending in 21-23. COVID spending in 2020 was massive and bipartisan.
At least Democrats pay for some of their increased spending with taxes (or, at the least ,not cutting taxes for wealthy). The best solution is Republicans holding Congress and Democrats holding the POTUS. That's when we got surpluses in the 90s and stabilized the debt in the 2010s. When we've had Dems in Congress and Republicans as President, both sides still want to spend. Republicans want to deny a Democratic POTUS anything, so that is better for spending and the debt.
You can't compare the stimulus spending to get us out of economic catastrophes set up by the GOP over and over as equal to what they did. Democrats are on clean up crew for every disaster for the last 25 years. They then get blamed for not fixing shit fast enough and the GOP gets in and digs the hole deeper.
Classic both sides. Republicans blew up the deficit giving tax breaks to pedophiles and bombing brown people. Democrats blow up the deficit trying to solve for problems caused by right wing policy.
Over 30% of the entire federal deficit has been created by team Trump.
I have to keep typing to meet the 140 character count minimum otherwise my comment will be removed automatically.
It's actually insane how quick debt has racked up under his two terms. Fiscal conservatism was never gonna be part of his administration when he can use taxpayer money to dish out lucrative contracts to family and friends.
The modern conservative movement rode in on a faux-fiscal-conservative Trojan horse filled with social uber conservatives. It was always about christian nationalism.
I know Trump is terrible and he made the problem worse through his unfunded tax cuts, but the deficit is not all from him. It was huge with Biden too and he made no effort to close the deficit.
The problem is America has a low fertility rate, is aging rapidly, and its mandatory spending on seniors through Social Security and Medicare is surging fast. There is no way to fix this without tax increases, the US is undertaxed relative to other OECD nations and needs more revenue to pay for its obligation to its growing senior population.
This is true, but one reason that makes me dislike the Republicans more for this has to do with the context of what happened during each administration
Deficit spending is a good thing when we need economic stimulus during a recession
The budget should be more balanced again when we are no longer in a recession
Both Obama and Biden started their terms during a bad economic period where large deficit spending is actually justified, and both of them also ended their terms with a deficit lower than when they started.
Bush and both of Trump's terms inherited good economies where the economic strategy should have been to keep things running smoothly, yet they decided to pass massive tax cuts that lasted for years. Then towards the end of their terms, the economy tanked and spending had to rise on top of the tax cuts they already passed. Biden wasn't even able to raise Trump's existing tax cuts while in office due to Congress.
If we look at the 2024 election again, you can straight up Google both candidate's budget plans and you will see that Harris's projected deficit would have been significantly lower than Trump's. Republicans baselessly demonized her as a "spender" yet Trump while actually in power immediately blew up the deficit and made things worse.
Nope. Look at the numbers for rump vs Biden. Biden did make an effort to close the gap. Trump was responsible for 25% of the entire debt his first term. With most of that debt coming BEFORE COVID. He tanked the economy and gave cuts to the rich. You’re not gonna both sides this. I really hope you’re a bot and not just willfully ignorant
Question- when the trust funds are exhausted, what happens to the benefit payments for Social Security? Do they stay the same, or are they constrained by statute to the revenues raised by the payroll tax?
If they are constrained by revenue, how is it possible that they contribute to the deficit?
We should be looking at the “on budget” deficit number.
When trust fund is exhausted, an across-the-board reduction of roughly 22% to 26% will automatically take effect. Projected to happen in 2032. But considering seniors have so much power in America, I'm certain a last minute bipartisan deal will come together which will raise taxes to cover this.
They are constrained by revenues so there is a 25% cut or so. Given aging demographics, I don't know how you address it without raising the payroll cap.
Most overlooked in Trump's first term was that he increased the annual budget deficit by nearly 80% pre-pandemic, reversing the prior trend, through both tax loans weighted towards the wealthy and a spending surge at a time when the economy really didn't need it. That put us in a much worse fiscal position going into the pandemic and worsened the impact of having to deal with the crisis and everything that followed. And this has been the pattern since Republicans adopted their "2 Santas strategy" towards the budget.
CBO projected deficits, January of each year:
1993: $310 billion - record deficit Reagan/Bush left Clinton.
2001 (surplus): $236 billion - record surplus Clinton left Bush, fueled by 1991 and 1993 deficit acts and a booming economy. Surpluses projected the rest of the decade.
2009: $1.4 trillion - record deficit W Bush left Obama as tax loans weighted towards the wealthy were passed, trillions spent on wars, and the bubble busted.
2017: $560 billion - deficit Obama left Trump, a record decline.
2020: $1 trillion (78% increase) - Trump's deficit pre-covid, fueled by tax loans weighted towards the wealthy and higher spending.
2021: $2.3 trillion (311% increase) - what Trump left Biden with covid spending temporarily boosting spending as a % of GDP.
2025: $1.8 trillion - while the primary deficit dropped significantly, interest payments surged and over half of the total deficit is now debt interest which is mainly from previous fiscal mismanagement and the interest rate increases. See W Bush and Trump trajectories. We should have continued the deficit reduction we saw under Obama, which would have put us in a far better position going into the pandemic.
2025: Trump/Republican tax bill passed in 2025 is expected to add $4-$5.5 trillion to baseline deficit projections over 10 years, depending on if any provisions sunset. Iran war additionally adds to debt.
2026: Trump launches a war with Iran. Some tariffs ruled illegal. Projected deficit for 2026 is $2-$2.1 trillion, a post-pandemic high. The increase in interest rates are not yet estimated.
My neighbor, nice guy overall, told me he was most concerned about the deficit during the last election. I pointed out to him that the plans that Harris and Trump respectively had put forward would have Trump increasing the deficit at almost three times the rate of Harris' plan (I forget the source at the time on that, I think it was Forbes). Pretty sure he still voted for Trump.
Strange how Republicans control all branches of government but somehow forgot they’ve been campaigning on reducing the deficit. It’s almost like they never gave a shit about the issue to begin with.
I though Trump's tarrifs were supposed to cure that. All I see are ballooning deficits and price increases. Talking about price increases I was looking for a nice well made down jacket. The one which would have perfect and which would last a lifetime increased in price from $300 to $1350. The quality of affordable jackets, the $150 and under kind, are a joke.it would surprised me if they last 3 seasons
He’s telling you that Weimar hyperinflation worked but it crushed the cash savings of everyone except for the ultra wealthy who had assets and debts that inflated away
Trump is great at one thing - bankruptcy. The business man who went bankrupt multiple times proved he could do it to the US, too. Meanwhile all Republican deficit hawks have proven to be deficit ostriches. Always on the attack about too much spending when a Democrat is president, then happily shoving their heads into the sand as soon as a Republican is in charge.
I know I have to use a bunch of characters here, but there really isn't much else to say. I suppose I could say thanks magas, unlimitedly it's their inability to discern the truth from a lie that got us here.
And now we're headed into the midterms not even being completely confident that he want adjust the outcome to suit him. And why not? No one would stop him and he has no interest in democracy or ethics whatsoever.
I'm glad I'm old, I only wish I hadn't lived to see the end of America.
I have begun to subscribe to the hypothesis that the manufacturer's of MAGA caps have put a chemical in the red dye that makes the wearer a lickspittle. It's based on the same parasites that cause rodents infected with Toxoplasma gondii to sacrifice themselves to cats.
It feels very much like there hasn't been an adult in the room when it comes to setting fiscal policy and budget in at least a quarter century now. Republicans recklessly cut taxes then do performative cuts to social services that they act like will fix the problem while spending huge amounts on the department of defense and getting involved in foreign conflicts for no reason, Democrats are too scared that it would lose them support if they meaningfully increased taxes and seem to largely support unchecked defense spending too. No one is seriously advocating for policies that would get us anywhere near a balanced budget because there's basically no way to do it without raising taxes. We desperately need an adult in the room
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 4 hours ago
Trump and the GOP, over 10 years, are responsible for 30% of all the debt this nation has ever accrued.
It’s safe to say we need to throw this fact in their lying faces every single time they try to use the debt as an excuse to starve children or cut cancer research.
The GOP are a failure. They have been hijacked by extremists who truly have no care for the fate of this nation if they can scurry off with more money than god.
They all need to go. Every single last one of them. And never allowed back until they clean house and get adults back in the room.
Qeltar_ | 3 hours ago
> It’s safe to say we need to throw this fact in their lying faces every single time they try to use the debt as an excuse to starve children or cut cancer research.
You can try, but it hasn't worked so far, so there's no reason to believe it will the next time.
They don't care and neither do their supporters.
You have to understand that hypocrisy works on you because you are logical and have shame. Neither applies to the MAGA crowd.
If Trump does it, it's good. If a Democrat does it, it's bad. Doesn't matter what it is.
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 3 hours ago
It’s not about proving them wrong.
It’s about immunizing the populace to their lies.
The greatest threat to these people is if they are ignored and laughed at. “Oh you care about the debt, no you don’t, let’s move on with healthcare reform”.
They crave attention and legitimacy. Deny them both. Remind the people their words are worthless and it’s a waste of your energy to entertain them.
Qeltar_ | 2 hours ago
There's nothing wrong with trying, and I can't say that I've stopped either or I wouldn't keep talking about it, I just no longer expect it to do any good.
The billionaire class has its hooks into everything now. They are openly buying the president and distorting elections. They run all of the major media outlets.
IMO things are much more likely to get worse than better. Everyone needs to be really sober about this. I am not hoping for major problems in society but historically that has been what was required for major change to occur.
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 2 hours ago
When a cancer spreads and metastases, the treatments become more intensive.
We should have stopped the spread when it was just stage 1, but now we are in stage 3 and their cancer has spread from the ass to our brain and heart.
Nobody likes chemo. But it’s better than being dead.
jumbee85 | 3 hours ago
And the remaining 70% is at least half from Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the Bush tax cuts. So we are looking at the majority of the deficit being because of republican ls
DrMoog | 36 minutes ago
Trump is the single human that did the most damage to the US. Ever. And it's not even close.
Constant-Plant-9378 | 3 hours ago
Unfortunately, Democrats have repeatedly proven complicit by consistently whipping just enough votes to help Republicans pass their budgets. Every. Time.
ChornWork2 | an hour ago
which democrats voted for the Big Beautiful Bill?
Uncle_Tickle_Monster | an hour ago
They used reconciliation to do that, so they didn't need any Democrats.
Most-Resident | an hour ago
That’s bullshit
“The House voted 218-214 to pass the Senate-amended bill on July 3, 2025.
218 Republicans voted yes.
212 Democrats voted no.
2 Republicans, Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), voted no.
The Senate voted 51-50 to pass the bill on July 1, 2025, with Vice President J.D. Vance (R) casting the tie-breaking vote in favor of the bill.
50 Republicans voted yes.
45 Democrats voted no.
Two independents who caucus with Democrats voted no.
Three Republicans, Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), and Rand Paul(R-Ky.), voted no.
Vice President J.D. Vance (R) broke the tie in favor of passage.”
https://ballotpedia.org/One_Big_Beautiful_Bill_Act
CautiousOptimism09 | 3 hours ago
Every single fucking time
harrumphstan | 31 minutes ago
Every fucking time a leftist tries to suppress Democratic turnout in a general election…
CautiousOptimism09 | 12 minutes ago
Hey man even as a leftist I made my piece during the primary and ate the Amy klobuschar shit sandwhich. Support the nom
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 2 hours ago
Then it’s time for New Democrats.
WarAmongTheStars | 2 hours ago
The only solution to this in American democracy is primaries. People need to be informed and primary the shit out of the Democrats.
hczimmx4 | 3 hours ago
Federal spending is at about 23% of GDP. Defense is less than 4% of GDP. The vast majority of federal spending is already on social programs. Those absolutely need cut to bring yearly deficits down.
Adventurous_Bath3999 | 3 hours ago
Really, and may I ask what they can realistically cut? Cut Social Security, which is people’s money, which is what they contributed to? Cut Medicare, again something people have already contributed to? So what exactly do you want to cut? The solution is to increase the taxes on the rich and remove FICA limits. Removing FICA limits itself will be a big part to solving the problem.
golf2k11 | 3 hours ago
They usually point to waste, fraud, and abuse as reason enough to just cut welfare entirely or something
Adventurous_Bath3999 | 2 hours ago
What waste is there with Social Security checks? What fraud are they talking about, how big is that, and where is the evidence? Same with Medicare… if there is fraud, then fix it, instead of derogatorily calling both of them as entitlements. They are both due entitlements… not handouts!
golf2k11 | 2 hours ago
I understand, but we’re living alongside people that believe all entitlement programs are bad because they’re paid through taxes. Your average right wing Joe thinks they’re being significantly held back by these programs existing at all. It’s idiocy.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
They are bad because they are paid through taxes. The government forcibly takes money from the people who own it, to give it to people who do not.
hczimmx4 | 3 hours ago
I would simply allow the automatic benefits cut to SS. I would cut all the welfare programs to zero. I would cut federal education spending to zero. I would reduce defense spending. I would eliminate refundable tax credits.
Increasing taxes on “the rich” doesn’t close the deficit. If tax increases are what you want, taxes would have to be increased across the board. I think people have a right to keep their own money. Obviously you disagree. How much of my money should you get?
golf2k11 | 2 hours ago
You wouldn’t be able to do any of that because those are not serious proposals. I don’t need your money, but many people need our money, and that’s part of being in a society. It’s time to grow out of this idea of rugged individualism for all lol
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
You could absolutely do these things.
You are free to give as much of your money to anyone you want. It’s yours, do what you wish with it. My objection is to you sending armed goons after me to take my money to give to others.
golf2k11 | 2 hours ago
You can’t because there’s a very small percentage of people who’d vote for you in the first place.
Societies don’t function without social programs. Look around the world and through time. You’re stuck in a fantasy world with this idea of taxation = theft. It’s part of existing in a society, and that’s that
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
It isn’t an idea the “taxation=theft”, specifically income taxation. It is theft. Is it paid voluntarily?
And paying income taxation is part of existing in a society? You don’t even believe that. If you did, you would want massive tax increases on the lowest earners, being they don’t pay taxes in the first place.
golf2k11 | 2 hours ago
You support social safety nets through progressive taxation and basic COL limits. Also, low earners still pay taxes like sales, payroll, and property taxes.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Sales and property taxes are totally irrelevant as it applies to the federal government.
As for payroll taxes, leave them the same and let the automatic cuts take effect.
magick_bandit | 3 hours ago
How about we start with Amazon paying the same effective tax rate as me?
Don’t reply, you’re clearly a moron.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Corporate rates should be zero. Corporations pass tax costs onto consumers and employees. This is why Trump’s tariffs are bad.
You won’t read this, mostly because it is above your reading comprehension level, but I’ll post it anyway.
https://www.mercatus.org/research/policy-briefs/who-really-pays-reevaluating-corporate-tax-burden#_edn5
harrumphstan | 26 minutes ago
Mercatus is a right wing libertarian think tank funded by the Kock family. It is not some neutral, academic source, but one pushing a fucknuts viewpoint to entrench aristocracy in America. It’s beneath any thinking person’s reading level.
dopechez- | 2 hours ago
Cutting those things to zero would literally collapse the US and turn it into a third world country overnight. It's not a serious proposal, it's reddit shitposting.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Why would it collapse the U.S.? And just because the federal government ended these programs, there would be absolutely nothing preventing your state from providing them. You could have your own state raise its own taxes to provide these.
dust4ngel | 2 hours ago
> You could have your own state raise its own taxes to provide these
"i'm against taxes, so i would eliminate taxes and then institute taxes to replace them."
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Yes, and I would argue that my state shouldn’t do any of these either. But if you wish to send your own states armed goons to take money from other people in your state, rather than on a national level, you do you.
American_Brewed | an hour ago
So you’re going to repeat the 1780s again? We had to reproach our doctrine because one of the main issues was being able to conduct government duties fiscally. Getting rid of taxes is beyond ridiculous. Taxes are a necessity even if we don’t like paying them.
hczimmx4 | an hour ago
There are other ways to raise funds for the government other than income taxes. Also, it is only fairly recently that the government engaged in charity. Charity isn’t a federal duty.
dopechez- | 2 hours ago
Because so much consumer spending is driven by government transfers and so many jobs only exist because of this spending. Many Healthcare jobs also only exist because the government pays for peoples' healthcare.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Still wouldn’t collapse. It would adjust.
dopechez- | 2 hours ago
It would cause a massive recession, probably a full blown 1929 style depression. So I don't agree.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
If done overnight, probably. If wound down over several years I am doubtful.
sgtbackpain03 | 2 hours ago
Jesus, you really want to reduce this country to ashes, don't you.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
I disagree that this would “reduce the country to ashes”. The country existed without these programs for longer than it has had them.
Adventurous_Bath3999 | 2 hours ago
I don’t get any of your money… so don’t go there, and I don’t need you for that. I have paid more taxes than what I will likely get back, anywhere near. Social Security has fully been paid into, so don’t talk about cutting it. Increasing taxes on rich needs to happen, as according to Warren Buffett himself thinks it is not quite fair.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
Do you know how social security works? Because it really seems you do not.
And increasing taxes on anyone doesnt need to happen. Spending the last time there was a surplus was about 17.5% of GDP. I am more than happy to cap federal spending at that level.
And don’t appeal to authority. If Warren Buffet wanted to pay more to the government, there is absolutely nothing stopping him.
Adventurous_Bath3999 | 2 hours ago
So you are going to teach me now how Social Security works… that is cute. What made you even say something silly like that?? Do you even know servicing our debt has become difficult, unless we collect more taxes? I guess you have no idea that it will only keep getting worse to the point that social benefit cuts will no longer be enough. Any party that talks about cutting either Medicare or Social Security will have no chance getting elected!
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
What made me say that? Look at your comment. Then learn how SS actually does work, and you will discover for yourself why I said that.
Servicing the debt could just as easily be accomplished by cutting spending.
As for not being elected without cuts to SS and Medicare, that may be true. But the problem will not get solved then.
Adventurous_Bath3999 | an hour ago
So you can’t explain why you made that silly statement in the first place, and then you keep repeating the same thing again… going in circles, are we… if ever increasing debt, at an astronomical rate, could simply be serviced by cutting spending, then you understand nothing. You can’t cut Social Security, which is fully paid by people… what part of something so simple do you not understand. You talk like an uncaring billionaire…are you that?
hczimmx4 | 55 minutes ago
You could actually leave SS exactly as it is. SS is self funded. Other spending could absolutely be cut. Spending the last time there was a surplus was 17.5% of GDP. And was only 26 years ago. I am perfectly fine with going back to that level. Are you?
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 2 hours ago
Return to the old tax system.
hczimmx4 | 2 hours ago
What tax system? Was revenue higher in this time frame you want to go back to?
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | 2 hours ago
Don’t care what the specifics are. Reverse 30+ years of tax cuts.
Since the 1990s this entire economy has been a free for all for the corrupt and connected. They used to shoulder the higher tax burden, but shifted it on to us instead.
This nation, this society allowed you to become a billionaire. It’s time to give back.
Don’t bother with a linear or step scale. Once you cross $100M net worth your taxes should be exponentially scaled.
hczimmx4 | an hour ago
What do you mean you don’t care what the specifics are? Obviously you do care, or you wouldn’t be stating you want to go back to some other tax code. So tell me, was revenue higher? I’ll answer for you, since you don’t care. Revenue was not higher.
And the tax code has become more progressive, not less. High earners shoulder a bigger share of the taxes collected. This is indisputable fact.
Why are you so hostile to people keeping their own property? I have no problem with people keeping their own money, it is theirs.
Why are you so comfortable sending brownshirts against people you politically disfavor?
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | an hour ago
Revenue per capita?
Don’t really care man. They didn’t care when it was time to cut critical services to pay for their tax cuts.
Why should they expect anything less in return?
hczimmx4 | an hour ago
“Critical services” weren’t cut. Spending was 17.5% of GDP the last time there was a surplus. It is about 23% of GDP now.
And you can not “pay for” tax cuts. Tax cuts are not spending.
Total revenue or revenue per capita. Revenue wasn’t higher.
Rattus_NorvegicUwUs | an hour ago
So you don’t think Medicare, Medicaid and social security are critical?
hczimmx4 | an hour ago
Do you? If so, let your own state fund them.
SuccotashOther277 | 3 hours ago
The national debt is truly a bipartisan issue. Yeah, Republicans drove it up with Iraq and tax cuts for the wealthy (2001, 2003, 2017, 2025). Democrats drove it up with the 2008 stimulus and post-COVID spending in 21-23. COVID spending in 2020 was massive and bipartisan.
At least Democrats pay for some of their increased spending with taxes (or, at the least ,not cutting taxes for wealthy). The best solution is Republicans holding Congress and Democrats holding the POTUS. That's when we got surpluses in the 90s and stabilized the debt in the 2010s. When we've had Dems in Congress and Republicans as President, both sides still want to spend. Republicans want to deny a Democratic POTUS anything, so that is better for spending and the debt.
cawkstrangla | 2 hours ago
You can't compare the stimulus spending to get us out of economic catastrophes set up by the GOP over and over as equal to what they did. Democrats are on clean up crew for every disaster for the last 25 years. They then get blamed for not fixing shit fast enough and the GOP gets in and digs the hole deeper.
BroughtBagLunchSmart | an hour ago
Classic both sides. Republicans blew up the deficit giving tax breaks to pedophiles and bombing brown people. Democrats blow up the deficit trying to solve for problems caused by right wing policy.
chrisproglf | 4 hours ago
Over 30% of the entire federal deficit has been created by team Trump. I have to keep typing to meet the 140 character count minimum otherwise my comment will be removed automatically.
mosthandsomechef | 4 hours ago
It's actually insane how quick debt has racked up under his two terms. Fiscal conservatism was never gonna be part of his administration when he can use taxpayer money to dish out lucrative contracts to family and friends.
hczimmx4 | 3 hours ago
What fiscal conservatism? Spending is up to about 23% of GDP. That is not fiscally conservative.
yrotsihfoedisgnorw | 30 minutes ago
The modern conservative movement rode in on a faux-fiscal-conservative Trojan horse filled with social uber conservatives. It was always about christian nationalism.
sfled | an hour ago
Spending is up and revenue is down. "Let's use tariffs to balance the budget," said the moron.
sfled | an hour ago
Comment replies, on the other hand...
(I just got dinged in another thread)
m77je | an hour ago
You mean debt, not deficit?
paperfire | 3 hours ago
I know Trump is terrible and he made the problem worse through his unfunded tax cuts, but the deficit is not all from him. It was huge with Biden too and he made no effort to close the deficit.
The problem is America has a low fertility rate, is aging rapidly, and its mandatory spending on seniors through Social Security and Medicare is surging fast. There is no way to fix this without tax increases, the US is undertaxed relative to other OECD nations and needs more revenue to pay for its obligation to its growing senior population.
Yellowdog727 | 3 hours ago
This is true, but one reason that makes me dislike the Republicans more for this has to do with the context of what happened during each administration
Deficit spending is a good thing when we need economic stimulus during a recession
The budget should be more balanced again when we are no longer in a recession
Both Obama and Biden started their terms during a bad economic period where large deficit spending is actually justified, and both of them also ended their terms with a deficit lower than when they started.
Bush and both of Trump's terms inherited good economies where the economic strategy should have been to keep things running smoothly, yet they decided to pass massive tax cuts that lasted for years. Then towards the end of their terms, the economy tanked and spending had to rise on top of the tax cuts they already passed. Biden wasn't even able to raise Trump's existing tax cuts while in office due to Congress.
If we look at the 2024 election again, you can straight up Google both candidate's budget plans and you will see that Harris's projected deficit would have been significantly lower than Trump's. Republicans baselessly demonized her as a "spender" yet Trump while actually in power immediately blew up the deficit and made things worse.
CmonRetirement | 3 hours ago
correct me if i’m wrong but spending on seniors doesn’t affect the deficit per se but only does because of the continued raiding of its “accounts”….
raising taxes vs closing loopholes
Suitable-Option833 | 2 hours ago
Nope. Look at the numbers for rump vs Biden. Biden did make an effort to close the gap. Trump was responsible for 25% of the entire debt his first term. With most of that debt coming BEFORE COVID. He tanked the economy and gave cuts to the rich. You’re not gonna both sides this. I really hope you’re a bot and not just willfully ignorant
TheGoodCod | 3 hours ago
We pay less but also get less.
mittenedkittens | 3 hours ago
Question- when the trust funds are exhausted, what happens to the benefit payments for Social Security? Do they stay the same, or are they constrained by statute to the revenues raised by the payroll tax?
If they are constrained by revenue, how is it possible that they contribute to the deficit?
We should be looking at the “on budget” deficit number.
paperfire | 3 hours ago
When trust fund is exhausted, an across-the-board reduction of roughly 22% to 26% will automatically take effect. Projected to happen in 2032. But considering seniors have so much power in America, I'm certain a last minute bipartisan deal will come together which will raise taxes to cover this.
SuccotashOther277 | 3 hours ago
They are constrained by revenues so there is a 25% cut or so. Given aging demographics, I don't know how you address it without raising the payroll cap.
gmb92 | 3 hours ago
Most overlooked in Trump's first term was that he increased the annual budget deficit by nearly 80% pre-pandemic, reversing the prior trend, through both tax loans weighted towards the wealthy and a spending surge at a time when the economy really didn't need it. That put us in a much worse fiscal position going into the pandemic and worsened the impact of having to deal with the crisis and everything that followed. And this has been the pattern since Republicans adopted their "2 Santas strategy" towards the budget.
CBO projected deficits, January of each year:
1993: $310 billion - record deficit Reagan/Bush left Clinton.
2001 (surplus): $236 billion - record surplus Clinton left Bush, fueled by 1991 and 1993 deficit acts and a booming economy. Surpluses projected the rest of the decade.
2009: $1.4 trillion - record deficit W Bush left Obama as tax loans weighted towards the wealthy were passed, trillions spent on wars, and the bubble busted.
2017: $560 billion - deficit Obama left Trump, a record decline.
2020: $1 trillion (78% increase) - Trump's deficit pre-covid, fueled by tax loans weighted towards the wealthy and higher spending.
2021: $2.3 trillion (311% increase) - what Trump left Biden with covid spending temporarily boosting spending as a % of GDP.
2025: $1.8 trillion - while the primary deficit dropped significantly, interest payments surged and over half of the total deficit is now debt interest which is mainly from previous fiscal mismanagement and the interest rate increases. See W Bush and Trump trajectories. We should have continued the deficit reduction we saw under Obama, which would have put us in a far better position going into the pandemic.
2025: Trump/Republican tax bill passed in 2025 is expected to add $4-$5.5 trillion to baseline deficit projections over 10 years, depending on if any provisions sunset. Iran war additionally adds to debt.
2026: Trump launches a war with Iran. Some tariffs ruled illegal. Projected deficit for 2026 is $2-$2.1 trillion, a post-pandemic high. The increase in interest rates are not yet estimated.
https://www.cbo.gov/data/budget-economic-data
MrDerpGently | 2 hours ago
That's a nice summary, and good data. Thanks.
DarkElation | an hour ago
When did presidents start controlling spending and taxation?
Ravenluna798 | 3 hours ago
He's bankrupting us. Just like he bankrupted all of his companies.
To all the people who voted for the "businessman" you're idiots.
God i wish we had better education here...
The_Wookalar | 3 hours ago
My neighbor, nice guy overall, told me he was most concerned about the deficit during the last election. I pointed out to him that the plans that Harris and Trump respectively had put forward would have Trump increasing the deficit at almost three times the rate of Harris' plan (I forget the source at the time on that, I think it was Forbes). Pretty sure he still voted for Trump.
CriticalDiscipline4 | 3 hours ago
Strange how Republicans control all branches of government but somehow forgot they’ve been campaigning on reducing the deficit. It’s almost like they never gave a shit about the issue to begin with.
One-Emu-1103 | 3 hours ago
I though Trump's tarrifs were supposed to cure that. All I see are ballooning deficits and price increases. Talking about price increases I was looking for a nice well made down jacket. The one which would have perfect and which would last a lifetime increased in price from $300 to $1350. The quality of affordable jackets, the $150 and under kind, are a joke.it would surprised me if they last 3 seasons
GuelphEastEndGhetto | 3 hours ago
I just read something where he said he will inflation his way out of the deficit. I wish it was satire.
StopICE2026 | an hour ago
He’s telling you that Weimar hyperinflation worked but it crushed the cash savings of everyone except for the ultra wealthy who had assets and debts that inflated away
sgtbackpain03 | 2 hours ago
> I though Trump's tarrifs were supposed to cure that. All I see are ballooning deficits and price increases
"I thought applying a knife to my cut hand would stop the bleeding, but all it did was make the bleeding worse".
SubtleIstheWay | 3 hours ago
At that rate, the deficit doubles every 6 years.
Trump is great at one thing - bankruptcy. The business man who went bankrupt multiple times proved he could do it to the US, too. Meanwhile all Republican deficit hawks have proven to be deficit ostriches. Always on the attack about too much spending when a Democrat is president, then happily shoving their heads into the sand as soon as a Republican is in charge.
jcooli09 | 3 hours ago
Thanks, trump.
I know I have to use a bunch of characters here, but there really isn't much else to say. I suppose I could say thanks magas, unlimitedly it's their inability to discern the truth from a lie that got us here.
And now we're headed into the midterms not even being completely confident that he want adjust the outcome to suit him. And why not? No one would stop him and he has no interest in democracy or ethics whatsoever.
I'm glad I'm old, I only wish I hadn't lived to see the end of America.
sfled | 59 minutes ago
I have begun to subscribe to the hypothesis that the manufacturer's of MAGA caps have put a chemical in the red dye that makes the wearer a lickspittle. It's based on the same parasites that cause rodents infected with Toxoplasma gondii to sacrifice themselves to cats.
Careless-Internet-63 | 3 hours ago
It feels very much like there hasn't been an adult in the room when it comes to setting fiscal policy and budget in at least a quarter century now. Republicans recklessly cut taxes then do performative cuts to social services that they act like will fix the problem while spending huge amounts on the department of defense and getting involved in foreign conflicts for no reason, Democrats are too scared that it would lose them support if they meaningfully increased taxes and seem to largely support unchecked defense spending too. No one is seriously advocating for policies that would get us anywhere near a balanced budget because there's basically no way to do it without raising taxes. We desperately need an adult in the room