Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, November 14, 2019

The federal deficit reached $134 billion in October, the first month of fiscal 2020, according to data the Treasury Department released Wednesday.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Trump can claim hes a lot of things but being fiscally conservative ain't in the cards.

FTA

" As a candidate, President Trump had promised to wipe out the nation's deficit during his time in office, but deficits have only grown since his inauguration."

#1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2019-11-14 12:41 PM | Reply

This will be the fault of the Dems.. next year if they win the Presidency.

#2 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-11-14 04:56 PM | Reply

Is a Democrat in the White House? checks notes... Deficits don't matter!

#3 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-11-14 05:14 PM | Reply

Tea Party where art thou??????

#4 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-11-14 06:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Tea Party where art thou??????

#4 | Posted by aborted_monson

In hibernation til the next minority president is in the white house.

#5 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-14 06:31 PM | Reply

Tea Party where art thou??????

Moved on. They're all QAnon now...

#6 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-11-14 06:33 PM | Reply

The feds are going to borrow and spend until the economy drops.
It doesn't matter who or what party is in power.

#7 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 06:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The feds are going to borrow and spend until the economy drops.
It doesn't matter who or what party is in power.

#7 | Posted by Ray

Which party has been worse for the deficit over recent decades ray? You can look this up. It's mathematical fact.

#8 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-14 06:42 PM | Reply

Which party has been worse for the deficit over recent decades ray? You can look this up. It's mathematical fact.
#8 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

It's a meaningless fact. Government borrowing has been rising exponentially since the sixties. Old debt is never paid down. It's rolled over year after year. This is a systemic problem.

But if you want to be partisan. The two most expensive government programs, Social Security and Medicare, were both advanced by the Democrats. They add up to almost half the budget.
www.dailykos.com

#9 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 06:56 PM | Reply

They add up to almost half the budget.
www.dailykos.com

#9 | Posted by Ray

The budget and the deficit aren't the same things dum dum.

You'll do anything to protect republicans.

Which party has been worse for the deficit?

#10 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-14 07:10 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

This is just a new record for Trump to be proud of!

Well, Trump and Ray.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2019-11-14 07:24 PM | Reply

The budget and the deficit aren't the same things dum dum.

I should have said "spending." As in "Federal Spending In One Beautiful Pie Chart"
In your world, Social Security and Medicare don't count.

Which party has been worse for the deficit?

It's a dumb question. They both spend recklessly.

#12 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 07:32 PM | Reply

Well, Trump and Ray.
#11 | POSTED BY CORKY

What a joke. As if Trump, Obama or any other president has control over spending.

Wonder why I buy gold? Someday this massive borrowing is going to come tumbling down.

#13 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 07:36 PM | Reply

"Wonder why I buy gold?"

Because stuffing it in a mattress over the last 8 years was too much to ask.

Instead, you lost money, while a simple index fund has more than doubled, up about 150%.

Good on you, guy-who-lost-money-while-others-doubled-theirs. You certainly showed them who's smart and who's dumb!

#14 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 07:39 PM | Reply

"It's a dumb question. They both spend recklessly."

Translation: The true answer to that question undermines my argument.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 07:40 PM | Reply

-Which party has been worse for the deficit?

You can blame Republicans for this. I don't care

But where have the Republicans been worse?

When they've occupy the White House or Congress?

The last two democratic presidents, Clinton and Obama, had mostly republican congresses, correct?

Perhaps you can say Republicans are less destructive when they're not in the White House but control Congress .....

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-14 07:57 PM | Reply

"You can blame Republicans for this"

But you can't.

"where have the Republicans been worse?"

What they got from Bill Clinton, to what they handed off to Barack Obama. You lived through it; why are you even asking the question? Dubya was the only President in our lifetimes to leave office with a lower DJIA than the day he arrived.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 08:00 PM | Reply

Which party has been worse for the deficit?

It's a dumb question. They both spend recklessly.

#12 | Posted by Ray

It's hilarious the extent you'll go to to avoid saying repubs are worse than dems on anything, even when fact and math prove they are.

Dems are proven to be better on the deficit than repubs. Look it up. Or just keep running away and changing the topic.

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-14 08:21 PM | Reply

"even when fact and math prove they are."

Ooooh....fact and math. You've hit on Ray's two weak subjects.

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 08:25 PM | Reply

I'd like to know what it is Republicans stand for nowadays.

#20 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-11-14 08:52 PM | Reply

I'd like to know what it is Republicans stand for nowadays.

#20 | Posted by madbomber

Defending a crook and con man no matter what he does.

#21 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-14 09:01 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-But you can't.

Yes I can.

#22 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-14 09:04 PM | Reply

"I'd like to know what it is Republicans stand for nowadays."

Slashing taxes for the wealthiest and stacking the Judiciary. Enabling Trump is just a means to the end; I doubt most Republicans are actually fooled.

Which, sadly, means most Republicans have forgone their morals for judges and money. Ironically, in the equation, it's money they'll have to pay back and then some, since the "tax cut bill" is actually a tax increase for all but the 1%.

#23 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 09:07 PM | Reply

But you can't.

"Yes I can."

But you didn't, and don't.

#24 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 09:09 PM | Reply

-why are you even asking the question?

Well, I asked where, not when. Congress isn't the WH.

Are the republicans worse in congress or in the WH?

#25 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-14 09:10 PM | Reply

-But you didn't,

I should have said "we can blame republicans..."

Because I do blame them.

#26 | Posted by eberly at 2019-11-14 09:12 PM | Reply

Instead, you lost money, while a simple index fund has more than doubled, up about 150%.
Good on you, guy-who-lost-money-while-others-doubled-theirs. You certainly showed them who's smart and who's dumb!
#14 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Only in your imagination. For the umpteenth time, I started buying in 2004. Gold and silver have doubled in that time.

#27 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 10:05 PM | Reply

It's hilarious the extent you'll go to to avoid saying repubs are worse than dems on anything, even when fact and math prove they are.
Dems are proven to be better on the deficit than repubs. Look it up. Or just keep running away and changing the topic.
#18 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

In your dreams. Both parties are corrupt to the core.

#28 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 10:08 PM | Reply

Ray is a consummate "There were good people on both sides" Know-Nothing.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-14 10:11 PM | Reply

Translation: The true answer to that question undermines my argument.
#15 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Dream on. It's a systemic problem. Not a party problem.

#30 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 10:11 PM | Reply

"Only in your imagination. For the umpteenth time, I started buying in 2004."

You were also still buying 8 years ago. I remember it vividly: early in the year in 2011, you were still touting gold, although you'd finally given up on "Dow 1400". I tried to pin you down on the Dow prediction, and you were sure it was later on that year, or if not, DEFINITELY the next year, which was the year Obama would be up for re-election. Early 2011.

Since then, you would've been better off selling your gold and stuffing the cash in a mattress. Or you could've invested it 8 years ago in an index fund, and you'd have more than doubled your investment.

"Gold and silver have doubled (since 2004)."

Oooooh! Up a whole 100%!!! Wow! Look at you!

Meanwhile, the Vangard 500 index fund is up 271%.
finance.yahoo.com

#31 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 10:17 PM | Reply

"Dream on. It's a systemic problem. Not a party problem."

What a pile of historical crap. Which party unilaterally reset the fiscal sights of America from Surplusville to Debtsylvania?

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 10:19 PM | Reply

#31 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I'm not impressed.

A lot of stocks and funds have lost money too.
I Understand gold and I know the history of governments going bankrupt.
And best of all, when stocks are overbought, gold is still cheap.

#33 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 10:29 PM | Reply

What a pile of historical crap. Which party unilaterally reset the fiscal sights of America from Surplusville to Debtsylvania?
#32 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Your partisan filters are as plain as day.

I think of gold as a bet against a corrupt economic system.

#34 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 10:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1


What a pile of historical crap.
#32 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

That hilarious coming from you DNCDan.

Your partisan filters are as plain as day.

We don't call him DNCDan for nothing ...

At no time during the Clinton presidency (or anytime afterwards) did the US Treasury report a debt less than the previous year ... there was no "surplus" never has been ...

Clinton spent social security "lockbox" surplus .... which of course needed to be paid back ...

#35 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-11-14 10:37 PM | Reply

I think of gold as a bet against a corrupt economic system.

POSTED BY RAY AT 2019-11-14 10:33 PM | REPLY

If the economy collapses what's Gold going to be worth?? If the dollar is worth nothing what metric are you going to base gold on?? It seems to me gold is going to be worthless too because you can't eat it.

#36 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-11-14 10:38 PM | Reply

"I'm not impressed."

I wouldn't expect anyone who has less than 37% of the wealth he'd have if he just did a basic investment to know enough to be impressed.

"A lot of stocks and funds have lost money too."

That's why an index fund is useful: it reduces risk.

"I Understand gold and I know the history of governments going bankrupt."

And your "The World Is Coming To An End" act is now in its fifteenth year. Meanwhile, you've missed out on over 170% more wealth.

"best of all, when stocks are overbought, gold is still cheap."

Possibly the dumbest statement ever. Hey, I lost money on bad investment, but now it's CHEAP! Isn't that GREAT?

#37 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 10:39 PM | Reply

"that hilarious coming from you"

There goes Mackris again, using Republican Math and being purposely stupid.

Clinton left behind true surplus budgets. Dubya and Cheney altered America's fiscal sights, and handed off a melting down economy and to that point, the largest deficits known to man since the dawn of time.

#38 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 10:42 PM | Reply

"Clinton spent social security "lockbox" surplus .... which of course needed to be paid back ..."

As usual, you don't know what TF you're taking about. There were surpluses since Reagan changed the withholding rates, all used for contemporary expenses. "Paid back" is an entry on an accounting line.

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 10:46 PM | Reply

"Your partisan filters are as plain as day."

I'm comparing both of them with the exact same math.

I realize it's at this point--MATH--you're lost. Hell, you don't even realize a gain of 271% is BETTER than a 100% gain.

#40 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:00 PM | Reply

Possibly the dumbest statement ever. Hey, I lost money on bad investment, but now it's CHEAP! Isn't that GREAT?
#37 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Lost money? That's what you want to believe.

The World Is Coming To An End

Sorry to disappoint you. I live well.
The fact remains, our economic system is engorged in debt and only getting worse.

That's why an index fund is useful: it reduces risk.

Many of them still lose money.

Meanwhile, you've missed out on over 170% more wealth.

I've been burned too many times with stocks.

#41 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:03 PM | Reply

"I think of gold as a bet against a corrupt economic system."

Why would you bet against a corrupt system, shouldn't the corrput system come out ahead?
???

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-14 11:08 PM | Reply

"Lost money? That's what you want to believe."

Gold has paid no dividends in the last 8 years, and is below its price of 2011. I believe math.

"Sorry to disappoint you. I live well. "

With 40% of the wealth you would've had if you'd simply chosen an index fund instead. Again, math.

"Many (index funds) still lose money."

Not over the last 15 years, they're all up about the same. You don't really understand what an index fund is, do you?

"I've been burned too many times with stocks."

That's the value of mutual funds: you're not buying ONE stock, you're buying fifty. Basically, if you've been burned too many times with stocks in a market that's up 271% in the last 15 years...you're picking the wrong stocks. Let me guess: you're your own advisor?

#43 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:10 PM | Reply

Danforth

I really don't give a sh** what you think.

#44 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:15 PM | Reply

Ray has been too cool for school since before we were born...

#45 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-14 11:17 PM | Reply

Why would you bet against a corrupt system, shouldn't the corrput system come out ahead?
???
#42 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Spoken by a true economic illiterate.

#46 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:18 PM | Reply

"I really don't give a sh** what you think."

That seems to be your problem: you think you know better, even when it's proven you don't. The fact you have less than half of what you would've had if you'd only used an index fund should speak volumes to you, and force you to question who you've been believing at the expense of more money. My guess is it's you, and you simply refuse to come to grips with math and facts.

#47 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:19 PM | Reply

You're saying the corruption of the system isn't to enrich the stakeholders of the system, Ray?

#48 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-11-14 11:20 PM | Reply

Wow! You are relentless.

That seems to be your problem: you think you know better, even when it's proven you don't.

It only proves my goals are entirely different than yours.

#49 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:22 PM | Reply

You're saying the corruption of the system isn't to enrich the stakeholders of the system, Ray?
#48 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

I'm saying that our economic and political systems are collapsing right in front of us.
If you don't see it, that's your problem.

#50 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:25 PM | Reply

"It only proves my goals are entirely different than yours."

Yup. Mine is to get a BIGGER return on my investments. Yours is to go for the 40%. You're not there yet, but keep trying.

#51 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:26 PM | Reply

"I'm saying that our economic and political systems are collapsing right in front of us."

You said the same thing 15 years ago.
And 14 years ago,
And 13 years ago.
And....

#52 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That's right. It's an ongoing process that can't end well.

All the Federal Reserve system is doing is pumping money into the system to keep it alive.
Federal spending is out of control.
The states are in debt beyond all means. They can't possibly meet their pension obligations.
Bubbles are everywhere.

From what you are telling me, you see none of this.

Go ahead. Party on while the music is playing.

#53 | Posted by Ray at 2019-11-14 11:38 PM | Reply

You said the same thing 15 years ago.
And 14 years ago,
And 13 years ago.
And....

POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2019-11-14 11:28 PM | REPLY

He's been stroking his gold for so long he's hoping for a loud Augasm. So far it only whimpers.

#54 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-11-14 11:40 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"From what you are telling me, you see none of this."

No, I see all of it. I don't see any of it at the tipping point, nor have I in the last 15 years.

"Go ahead. Party on while the music is playing."

Well, the basic S&P 500 index fund is up 171% more than your gold. Seems like you left the party at least a decade and a half too early.

#55 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-14 11:44 PM | Reply

- Party on while the music is playing.

The last time Ray partied was when McKinley signed the Gold Standard Act in 1900. He's became depressed when FDR ditched it, and then went into hermitism when Nixon agreed.

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2019-11-14 11:51 PM | Reply

The two most expensive government programs, Social Security and Medicare, were both advanced by the Democrats. They add up to almost half the budget.

But were also enacted with their own funding mechanisms.

Poor example. Try again.

#57 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-14 11:55 PM | Reply

#57 |

They also give Ray health care and beer money.

#58 | Posted by Corky at 2019-11-15 12:00 AM | Reply

I've always wondered what his level of participation was in these things he despises so much.

Probably has the standard justifications for why it's no problem as well.

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-15 12:33 AM | Reply

"The two most expensive government programs, Social Security and Medicare, were both advanced by the Democrats. They add up to almost half the budget"

Nonsense. The only effect on the budget is the amount over and above the constant income stream of payroll taxes. Morons who don't know any better will only proffer the outgo part of the equation.

#60 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-11-15 01:27 AM | Reply

Nonsense. The only effect on the budget is the amount over and above the constant income stream of payroll taxes. Morons who don't know any better will only proffer the outgo part of the equation.

#60 | Posted by Danforth

A much better way of saying what I was thinking.

I've been searching for numbers on how much of SS outlays, dollar amount or percents, isn't covered by payroll taxes.

I realized people talk about unfunded liabilities but I don't recall discussion of current ins vs outs.

In any case, it seems we're back to GOP "governance" being the millstone around our neck-a bloated DoD budget and the necessary spending to mop up after the DoD spends it.

#61 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-15 02:00 AM | Reply

Republicans ---- up everything when they're in control.

They told us tax cuts would trickle down to everyone.

They haven't trickled down. Except as golden showers.

#62 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-11-15 02:39 AM | Reply

In your dreams. Both parties are corrupt to the core.

#28 | Posted by Ray

Your entire philosophy relies on pretending they are EQUALLY corrupt. A total fantasy.

Which one gave massive permanent tax cuts to billionaire donors? Which one appointed polluters to run the EPA?

Which one changed the laws to make it okay for oil companies to bribe corrupt foreign regimes?

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-11-15 01:14 PM | Reply

They haven't trickled down. Except as golden showers.

#62 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Some of it is the champagne being callously sprayed about as the 1% laugh their assess off at how easy it is to dupe 40% of the population into voting against their best interests in favor of the 1%'s.

#64 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-15 02:36 PM | Reply

The bankruptcy-prone------------ is on another roll.

#65 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2019-11-15 05:53 PM | Reply

Some of it is the champagne being callously sprayed about as the 1% laugh their assess off at how easy it is to dupe 40% of the population into voting against their best interests in favor of the 1%'s.

#64 | Posted by jpw

I've read the wealth of the top 1% will exceed the entire assets of the middle class next year.

#66 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-11-15 06:33 PM | Reply

>leftists believe the entire federal deficit is the fault of orange man bad

#67 | Posted by berserkone at 2019-11-15 10:12 PM | Reply

>leftists believe the entire federal deficit is the fault of orange man bad

#67 | POSTED BY BERSERKONE AT 2019-11-15 10:12 PM |

leftists? Any thinking person. The deficit was reduced from $1.4T under Bush to $400B by Obama. Under Trump it reversed course as a direct result of

1) Increased Spending
2) another tax cut in the face of deficits

So yes the rise in the deficit is the fault of the Orange man

#68 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-11-15 10:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

So yes the rise in the deficit is the fault of the Orange man

#68 | Posted by hatter5183

But there's always been a deficit.

So nuh uh!

-righties

#69 | Posted by jpw at 2019-11-16 12:49 AM | Reply

The democrats control the House. Therefore all budgets.

Is the current bills in the House projecting a surplus and plans to pay off the national debt?

#70 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-11-16 10:56 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort