Bush Policies Create $54 Billion Dallor Budget Surplus

from JoeUser Forums
That's right people, (especially you Doom and Gloomers) the Treasury Department this week reported there would be a $54 billion budget surplus in the April-to-June quarter. The Treasury Department also said that it will repay $42 billion in federal debt this quarter, instead of borrowing $12 billion.

Link


Since some people like to gloat about every misfortune that happens to the Bush Presidency, I thought I would post this one to show how idiotic cherry picking info can be. While in the short term this statement is 100% true, but in the long term and historically this posting would be out of context. But I was hoping this would get the blood up of those who post articles like this repeatedly and ignore the larger context. When their "facts" are shown to not truly reflect trends and ignore external events they most commonly put their blinders on and go la la la la la la la la.

I would also like to point out that I did post my links, and the story is 100% true.

Let the mud slinging begin.
politics
12,285 views 34 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
And to think were still paying for the Spanish American war.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Wait, wait, my deluded friend. You seem to think that this has something to do with TRUTH, or FACT, or HARM. Don't be silly. This is about MISINFORMATION, PROPAGANDA, and BRAINWASHING.

The whole "Lying for Truth" phenomenon demands that people who hate the President spread as much rumor and innuendo as possible. That's just a tiny moral sin compared to the great social benefit of undermining the authority of the Presidency and demoralizing Americans during a war.

I'd like to think you'll get tons of play on this, but honestly people don't want to hear that things are fine. They want some wolf-in-concerned-citizen's clothing to tell them how the nation is spiraling toward collapse. You can't expect them to hate their spouse, or their boss, or anyone else who frightened them or made them mad today. They need the Col to give them reason to hate Bush.
SoundPackager - Customize the Windows sound scheme
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
I agree with baker {not unusual} I am sure that the bush haters will figure out a way to doom and gloom this news, somehow.
watch and see, if they bother to reply at all.
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
Thanks Lee for posting this article. Please note that I will be posting a an article with more detail from the Washington Post article, but I don't want to steal your thunder. Good job on posting this news.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
" I agree with baker {not unusual} I am sure that the bush haters will figure out a way to doom and gloom this news, somehow.


If it falls in line with "we've only spent x dollars" Iraq propaganda, it will be "$54 billion dollars in revenue was never even spent by the government!!!"
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
how can we be running surplus a $54 billion when we had a annual projected budget deficit of 425 billion which fails to account $50 billion of the supplemental that Bush requested for the Iraq war? What we have is a temporary spike in collections we do not have a surplus. A surplus is when you collect more than you spend which is not what is happening with the United States federal budget.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
6 by COL Gene
Thursday, May 05, 2005


how can we be running surplus a $54 billion when we had a annual projected budget deficit of 425 billion which fails to account $50 billion of the supplemental that Bush requested for the Iraq war? What we have is a temporary spike in collections we do not have a surplus. A surplus is when you collect more than you spend which is not what is happening with the United States federal budget.


as predicted there it is... doom and gloom.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
6 by COL Gene
Thursday, May 05, 2005


how can we be running surplus a $54 billion when we had a annual projected budget deficit of 425 billion which fails to account $50 billion of the supplemental that Bush requested for the Iraq war? What we have is a temporary spike in collections we do not have a surplus. A surplus is when you collect more than you spend which is not what is happening with the United States federal budget.


as predicted there it is... doom and gloom.


How is COl Gene being a doom and Gloomer here?
He wrote nothing negative about your beloved Pres, just stated a fact about a surplus.

Personally I'll believe it when I sees it

It is you guys on the Bush side of the fence who are overly sensitive
Reply #9 from PolMach Forums Top
Reply #6 By: COL Gene - 5/5/2005 11:01:57 AM
how can we be running surplus a $54 billion when we had a annual projected budget deficit of 425 billion which fails to account $50 billion of the supplemental that Bush requested for the Iraq war? What we have is a temporary spike in collections we do not have a surplus. A surplus is when you collect more than you spend which is not what is happening with the United States federal budget.


Bingo, you got it Sir. That is why I wrote this article. Now your putting the Article into context. There has been repeated articles, as of late, that when I responed as you did. The author simply ignored the common sence reply, just like the one you just made, but I also gave links to show historical and relavent data.

The US Treasury will collect $54 billion in tax revenue more then spent this quarter. The title is correct, it is still a budget surplus (just quarterly, but why should that matter, right? ). Just the article is written with less bial and contempt.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
What I have stated is reality it has nothing to do with gloom and doom. You have added the gloom and doom what I have stated is factual. Last year for example the National debt increased $595 Billion in one year. At the end of this fiscal year we will see how much the National Debt has increased. With 100% confidence the debt will be larger Sept 30, 2005 then it was in Sept 30, 2004!
Reply #11 from PolMach Forums Top
Reply #4 By: Citizen terpfan1980 - 5/5/2005 7:29:57 AM
Thanks Lee for posting this article. Please note that I will be posting a an article with more detail from the Washington Post article, but I don't want to steal your thunder. Good job on posting this news.


I would like to see what you come up with, maybe there is more to the article about the amount of tax revenue incoming Vs tax cuts. There could be more legs to this article.

I'm also interested in both sides of the political divid with data and with some interesting theories. This article is as much to make a point, as it is just to put some interesting facts out. Don't worry about stealing my thunder.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
I like the enthusiastic tone of this thread. It's always nice to have something good to hold on to, especially in these troubled times we currently live in. Negative facts do not make scenarios 'doom and gloom' any more than positive facts make a smooth rose-lined path ahead. It's easier to see it in a comparative light. I'm charging $1000 every month on my Visa. Every month I pay Visa $200. Every month my overall debt goes up $800. One month I win a lottery. So instead of $200 I pay $600. I am still in the negative. The end. An apparent one-time spike in accounts receivables does not a healthy bottom line make.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
What I have stated is reality it has nothing to do with gloom and doom.


Of course it is. That is all you do. Post after post about how bad things are, but for some reason you never post in the articles that show good things coming from the economy. You aren't happy unless you can somehow blame Bush for something.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
I can not help the results of Mr. Bush appear to be gloom and doom to you. They are what they are!
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, shame on you guys. Col Gene is the only one here whose links and statistics are to be trusted, don't you know that?

When HE posts a link saying we must have more taxes, it defines the situation. When anyone else posts a link showing we had enough taxes this quarter it is easily dismissed. Much better we strangle the economy in the hopes that things will suck a lot worse than they do. Heck, we might even MAKE them suck...

Hate is the point; blind irrational hate. Well, either that or blind, premedited misinformation and propaganda. Either way such two dimensional pamphlets are a waste of space here at JU.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
By your lodgic if we have a quarter that have excess taxes we should return it and if we have a quarter with a deficit we should send bills to all you Bushies.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
By your logic if we have a quarter that have excess taxes we should return it and if we have a quarter with a deficit we should send bills to all you Bushies.


Why don't you take your doom and gloom Bush bashing to somewhere that it's actually read you screwball. *Your* brand of logic defies logical definition.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler You are an idiot that lacks the capacity for the simplest rational response. The only thing you're capable of is spewing out meaningless defense arguments for a person whose policies are creating huge problems for the future of this country.
Reply #19 from PolMach Forums Top
Why don't you take your doom and gloom Bush bashing to somewhere that it's actually read you screwball. *Your* brand of logic defies logical definition.



--I'd personally like to find ou what is logical and illogical in polotics...never seemed to be defined clearly..just made up when suited the specific person...ALSO, the good ol' senator gordan smith [D-Oregon, where i live...] is being "leveled" because of an "UnMoral" trip to ireland or some place...BS...[strangly, he is a Demi, but not too much of one, he is a 'moderate' demi....kind of a coincedence]
Reply #20 from PolMach Forums Top
drmiler You are an idiot that lacks the capacity for the simplest rational response. The only thing you're capable of is spewing out meaningless defense arguments for a person whose policies are creating huge problems for the future of this country.


--COL, ironically...i am going to take your side in this debate...cause i've been looking at the us's economy numbers and they seem a little strange to me......[BTW,i am an independent, who leans slightly right.] [and lives in an uber-liberal city....Eugene Oregon]
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
drmiler You are an idiot that lacks the capacity for the simplest rational response. The only thing you're capable of is spewing out meaningless defense arguments for a person whose policies are creating huge problems for the future of this country.


Hey *col*, turn that right around and look in a mirror. Because you are obviously talking about yourself! The only thing you're capable of, is spewing out meaningless arguments against a person whose policies who in your opinion is creating huge problems for the future of this country.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top

--COL, ironically...i am going to take your side in this debate...cause i've been looking at the us's economy numbers and they seem a little strange to me......[BTW,i am an independent, who leans slightly right.] [and lives in an uber-liberal city....Eugene Oregon]


Hey......Lucas. You taking his side in calling me an idiot? All he ever does is talk about what he considers GW's bad wether it's his policies or his decisions or whatever else he can find that don't suit him. "Never" about *anything* positive. We've heard the same crap from him since November of 2004.
Reply #23 from PolMach Forums Top
--Not in calling you an idiot, just about the economy, in how could there be a surplus when there's been a deficit...*shakes his head* never mind...never been good in economics...sure,i haven't heard many things fro COL G, that have a positive feeling...mostly whats wrong with ____ [insert subject]....anywho...don't mind me...i'm at home sick with pnumonia and a strep throat...probably not thinking "right"....
Reply #24 from PolMach Forums Top
Lets keep the name calling to as little as possible here.

I seldom (if ever) strait out call people names and object to others doing so on my thread. It does not matter who or where a person started it, it does not help a make any point other then making it harder for others to willingly support the views of the offender.

There are many times I would like to back some one up, but change my mind after the name calling begins.

Thanks you for posting on my thread, but mind your manors.

Lee1776
Reply #25 from PolMach Forums Top
hey, i am...i have the ut-most respect for a majority of the people on this website...yes, occasionally i lose my temper...but its usually taken care of later [e.g. i apologize,etc...] there are others that i just don't understand....