Despite $4.4 Trillion in Spending Cuts, Trump's Budget Won't Balance Until 2035

And whether it balances at all depends on some creative accounting. Meanwhile, it proposes $2 billion in new spending on the border wall.


On the campaign trail in 2016, President Donald Trump promised to eliminate the national debt in eight years. On Monday, he will propose a budget that won't even balance for another 15 years—a clear admission that he will leave the federal government's finances in a more precarious state than he found them.

Trump's 2021 budget proposal will be a $4.8 trillion spending plan, according to The Wall Street Journal, which reviewed the White House's budget in advance of its official unveiling on Monday. It calls for an increase in military spending, proposes $2 billion for Trump's planned border wall, and cuts $40 billion from non-military discretionary spending (including a 26 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency's budget), the Journal reported on Sunday.

Over the course of the next decade, Trump's budget would cut an estimated $4.4 trillion in domestic spending—including $2 trillion in promised savings from entitlement programs, largely the result of proposed changes in Medicare's prescription drug pricing model.

Overall, federal spending would climb from $4.6 trillion next year to more than $6.5 trillion in 2030. The proposed domestic spending cuts in this year's budget are hardly enough to balance out the spending increases that Congress has passed and Trump has approved in recent years.


Trump's proposal would cut the federal deficit from over $1 trillion in the current fiscal year to a mere $966 billion next year—nearly 50 percent higher than the $666 billion deficit Trump inherited from President Barack Obama in 2017. Trump's budget would have the federal government operating in the red until 2035, the Journal reports.

It's important to keep in mind that all of this is likely the rosiest possible scenario for the federal budget. The budget proposal assumes 3 percent annual growth, a number that has not been achieved since the Bush administration—not even in the immediate aftermath of Trump's tax cuts, which briefly revved the economy—and one that far exceeds the Congressional Budget Office's estimated growth rate of 1.7 percent over the next decade.

And the proposed spending cuts are unlikely to get a warm reception from Congress. Presidential budgets are typically ignored by the legislative branch anyway, but recent history suggests that Trump is unwilling to go to the mat for any aspect of his spending plan. After calling for similar domestic spending cuts last year, Trump turned around and signed a budget deal that hiked spending by $320 billion and obliterated previous spending caps.

The previous year, Trump called for cutting the Department of State's budget by 29 percent and the Environmental Protection Agency's by 25 percent, but Congress instead agreed to a bipartisan budget plan that boosted domestic discretionary spending across the board (while also providing an increase for the Pentagon). And that was when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress.

That Trump has long since abandoned his never-all-that-serious plan to deal with the national debt should be obvious by now. At a private dinner last month, Trump reportedly responded to criticism about inflating the deficit by asking, rhetorically, "Who the hell cares about the budget?" Former congressional deficit hawk Mick Mulvaney, who now heads the White House's Office of Management and Budget, has said "nobody cares" about the deficit. And Vice President Mike Pence went on MSNBC last week to argue that deficits can help boost economic growth—a talking point that used to send Republicans into a tizzy when Obama employed it.

The problem with all that is that a large and growing national debt reduces economic growth. The CBO projects that the average American household will lose between $2,000 and $6,000 in annual wealth by 2040 if the current trajectory continues. It also says America's GDP will shrink by 2 percent over the next two decades if current policies continue and the debt keeps growing.

But short-term thinking dominates Washington these days. And Trump, despite his outsider status, has quickly acclimated to the consensus political view that fixing the national debt will have to be the next president's problem.

NEXT: This New Deal Precedent May Decide the Fate of Elizabeth Warren's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Trump promised to eliminate the national debt in eight years.

    He didn’t say *which* eight years. Gotcha!

    1. We should let Trump do with the federal government what he does best in the private sector: declare bankruptcy.

      1. Winner, winner, chicken dinner!!!


        Donald Trump’s Idea to Cut National Debt: Get Creditors to Accept Less

      2. He has had over 500 businesses. 5 of them have declared bankruptcy. That’s 1%. The facts say what he does best is run successful, profitable businesses.

    2. The DEBT is not the DEFICIT. And the DEFICIT is not the DEBT. They are separate problems.

      Government BORROWING drives up the debt, not government SPENDING.

      The solution to our debt problem is simple: STOP ISSUING DEBT-BASED MONEY! Begin issuing pure “unbacked” fiat money to fund the deficit, rather than going further into debt. The inflationary impact of unbacked dollars is no worse than the inflationary impact of the same amount of debt-backed dollars. Issuing unbacked dollars will halt the increase in the national debt and its crushing $479 billion in annual interest. Paying off part of the maturing debt each year and rolling over the rest will eventually bring the national debt (and its taxpayer-financed interest payments) down to zero. See http://www.fixourmoney.com .

      1. It’s important to know the difference and to show the difference. Much of what we are fed by news companies (with their own agenda and bias) is not clear, not even reasonable sometimes, and often lacking essential details.
        Most people, and this includes news editors, reporters, politicians, don’t really understand finance. It takes time and experience to learn. Personally, I had big debts at one period but now I’m debt free and net worth is much more than I had dreamed it would be. It’s possible and it’s done all the time by individuals, families, small businesses, and I’ve even read about knowledgeable city governments that knew how to manage finances. People get worried and panicky when they don’t understand what is happening.

      2. No, spending is the problem. If they didn’t spend so damn much, they wouldn’t have to borrow. I think the government could cut spending to the amount it takes in, a cut of some 25% or so, and nobody would even notice.

        1. 60% of Federal spending goes to Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the national debt. Another 21% goes to military spending. *Everyone* would certainly notice if spending were cut by 25%.

      3. Anyone who tried to make sure the banksters could not make billions on the national debt, was eliminated. England just finished paying its loans for World War One, a hundred years later. Imagine the compounded interest….people’s hard earnings transferred to bankers who do absolutely nothing, who make absolutely nothing and yet are billionaires.

        The other problem is what I call the Al Capone principle. If you steal a great deal of money all by yourself, they will certainly put you in jail. If you steal a great deal of money and distribute a piece of the action, they will not only not put you in jail, they will devise schemes and help you steal even more. The industrial military complex is good at these schemes.

        It is hypocritical for the US government to point the finger at little Ukraine and say it is one of the most corrupt country in the world. Corruption in Ukraine is chump change compared to the hidden corruption prevalent in the US. The difference is that the US has made most of its corruption legal. However, legal or not, or disguised in any other fashion, it still has the same detrimental effect. When more and more people steal more and more money from a smaller diminishing group who actually work and produce products, the system will go belly up. The feds throwing more and more money into it, not only kicks the problem down the road, it makes it bigger.

        This is how civilizations disappear. It is no mystery what happened to the Inca civilizations. There were more and more high priests, those who did nothing but gorge on a smaller and poorer group, demanding more and more. The workers, figured it was better to leave rather than live like slaves, leaving the high priests to their own devices. Since there was no one to feed off of, they too eventually disappeared into the jungle.

        Trump won’t change much of anything, like in the all powerful Roman and English empires, the rot comes from within.

      4. That’s fundamentally nonsense.

        Debt-backed dollars only drive inflation by the interest paid out (as that’s the only ‘new’ money), and that interest is spread out over the lifetime of the loan. Printing money (unbacked fiat currency) drives inflation by the full value, and the full value becomes inflationary immediately.

        If the fundamental problem isn’t inflation, why does it matter if the government borrows or prints money? Why does that annual interest matter?

        But the real problem is government spending. The government borrows money BECAUSE it spends that money. And the only answer is less government spending, and more pertinently, inculcating a mindset in Washington that wants to reduce spending. (Raising taxes doesn’t help, because politicians who aren’t spending-averse will simply spend it all on new programs, which puts you right back in the same predicament).

        1. The annual interest is also borrowed, and is a major reason why the national debt continues to explode. Interest on the national debt is now responsible for about half of our $1 trillion annual deficit. This is unsustainable. If we stop issuing debt-backed money, the national debt will stop rising and we will have a realistic chance of paying it off. If unbacked fiat currency “becomes inflationary immediately” that’s a good thing, because it will make the consequences of excessive spending obvious to everyone and will encourage voters to demand that politicians start spending less. The alternative is to kick the can down the road and create an even more monstrous debt for the next generation. See http://www.fixourmoney.com .

      5. LOL… You’re fiat printing out-of-debt plan has already been done many times before and EVERY SINGLE time it has utterly collapsed the entire nations that tried it. Was destroying the U.S. your goal in this propaganda garbage comment or what?

    3. If the corrupt Socialist Democrat Establishment Elite gain complete control of our government, we will be bankrupt after 4 years of the 3rd World Wide Depression.
      If Trump gains a majority of supporters in Congress we will begin the greatest period of prosperity the world has ever know and revenues will double wiping out the deficit.
      If Congress also votes to reduce Government waste we will be able to pay off our debt too.
      If we educate the population instead of indoctrinating them we will wipe out poverty.
      If we end the Jobs/Welfare for underpaid foreigners, they will self deport and we will only need the wall to mark our border and help keep out the drugs and terrorist.

  2. Do these debt figures include the costs of Trump’s idea to buy Greenland from Denmark? As a costs savings, could we PLEASE sell California to Denmark, to raise the money to buy Greenland?

  3. But short-term thinking dominates Washington these days.

    It didn’t before?

    Somebody needs to explain time preference and inflationary fiat currency to these guys.

  4. Boehm had this shitty article cucked and loaded for Monday.

    1. …a clear admission that he will leave the federal government’s finances in a more precarious state than he found them.

      HAHA. unreason is such a joke now.

    2. Just like you had this shitty nonsensical remark loaded for today.

      1. Poor upset unreason staff.

      2. Ahahah look how butthurt it made you ahahahaha

      3. loveunconstitution1789 is a parody!

        1. Poor unreason sock trolls.

  5. ╔════╗───────────────╔═══╦═══╦═══╦═══╗─╔╗╔╗╔╗

  6. “He will leave the federal government’s finances in a more precarious state than he found them.”

    We shouldn’t expect anything less from this great “business” con!

    1. “”“He will leave the federal government’s finances in a more precarious state than he found them.”””

      When was the last time a president didnt’?

      1. Clinton…..

        1. Good call. Also not that the while the deficit spiked early in the Obama administration it did go down in throughout the President’s years in office.

          1. It’s time to admit that Democratic Presidents in recent years have been more fiscally conservative.

            1. Recent decades have shown the winning formula to be Democrat President + Republican Congress. You need both elements.

              1. Not when the Democrat is an open socialist. And that’s what you have left to choose from now.

                1. President Sanders with a Republican Senate will cut the deficit more than President Trump.

                  1. If you believe that, then you haven’t paid attention to anything in Sanders’ political career.

                    The man is stupid and a communist true believer. He doesn’t give a shit about laws or budgets or reality. He literally poached his campaign platform from the 1936 Soviet constitution, written by Joseph Stalin. He’s not about to be constrained by a bunch of leaderless Republicans in Congress if he gets elected, and he’s openly said he will do anything he wants via executive order if the GOP complains.

                    You’re an idiot if you don’t believe a communist when they tell you that.

                    1. You are suggesting that a President Sanders would follow the precedents of President Trump and just spend what he wants by executive order. Is that correct?

                    2. Actually, none of Trump’s executive orders have exceeded his Constitutional authority or additional authority granted to him legislatively by Congress. He has stayed within the law, and has abided by any court decisions his administration lost. Sanders, on the other hand, is campaigning on a platform of he’ll do what he wants by executive order…legal or not.

                      So you might as well stick that lie back in your pocket…nobody here is buying it except for the socks.

                    3. Remind me when Senator Sanders said he would use EOs regardless if they are legal. Many of President Trump’s EOs have been challenged in the court and some have passed muster. Some remain questionable.

              2. Agreed

            2. Except for Obama’s submitted budgets called for trillions more than the House allocated. But sure, give obama credit. Who needs to actually understand how the government works before weighing in.

          2. The debt doubled under Obama

            1. Oh, is that the criterion you wanna use to judge a president? Cause I got some sad, sad news for you.

              1. That you never passed 5th grade civics and think the president is the primary driver of debt?

                1. The increasing debt is primarily driven by three items…Social Security, Medicaid/Medicare, welfare. If you don’t make cuts to those three things, it doesn’t really matter what other discretionary spending you cut. No President is going to promise to cut those things and no Congress is going to vote to cut those things (maybe welfare) because it would be electoral suicide.

                  Trump is at least trying to cut discretionary spending. It won’t fix the problem, but it’s better than nothing. All of the Democrats are proposing throwing gasoline on that dumpster fire and will make it catastrophically worse. Those are your two choices in this election…the guy who will try to make some cuts versus the party that wants to drown the entire country in debt because they don’t give a shit if it collapses as long as they get to be king of the ashes.

                  1. It is not so clear about Social Security which is a payroll tax split between employer and employee. While it is a huge piece of the pie in expenditure it cannot legally contribute to the deficit. It has historically had a surplus which goes to treasury notes. The worry is that if the aging retired population increases faster than the workforce there could be a problem.

                    Medicare and Medicaid are different. The basic issue there is the rising cost of medical care. That is a different discussion because demand and supply curves are inelastic for medicine. It is why the Bernie types have a superficial argument where “top men” will fix it. Of course they won’t unless they ration supply which never works.

                    Medicare and Medicaid are funded and intended differently. One is tied to the FICA tax you pay. The other is a reimbursement to providers for medical care to the indigent and relies on both state and federal funds. So the two need to be considered separately.

                    Employer based insurance is a great deal for a number of reasons. Employed people are generally healthier and younger. A group rate can be negotiated with insurance companies who in turn negotiate with providers. Pretty simple formula. Medicare kicks in for the old expensive folks who are no longer in the mix.

                    1. Those Treasury notes are nothing more than IOUs from the federal government to the beneficiaries. They’re basically promissory notes, with the lender saying “We promise to pay you back at some point in the future with the money we’re going to make”. But the feds are under no legal obligation to pay if they don’t have the money to do so when those notes come due because those notes do not represent equity for the payee (per Flemming v Nestor, 1960).

                    2. Medicare and Medicaid are different. The basic issue there is the rising cost of medical care.

                      A problem exacerbated by the price floor that Medicaid and Medicare set.

                2. Jesse logic:
                  1) Trump is responsible for the tax cuts!
                  2) Trump is not responsible for the spending, because that’s on Congress!

                  Jesse, you a dumdum.

                  1. Chipper. It is amazing how you constantly make yourself look completely retarded. Did you even comprehend what I wrote? I clearly pointed you to 4th grade civics to tell you where spending originates. The president is not where it starts. He was just fucking impeached for not spending quickly enough dumbfuck.

                    Both spending measures before him were passed with veto proof numbers.

                    It is amazing how stupid you truly are.

                    1. Here is a good summary of JesseSPAZ = trumpbot:


                      Toward a General, Intuitive, Psychological Theory of Evil
                      The trumpbot lifestyle that makes humankind tick like a time bomb.

                      If it sounds good, it’s about me. If it sounds bad, it’s about my competitors.
                      Confirmation bias is another name for the trumpbot’s algorithm: “If it confirms me I’m listening if it doesn’t affirm me I’m not listening.”

                      Almost all people recognize confirmation bias in others (“I hate know-it-alls”) but many people think that because they see and hate confirmation bias in others, they must not be susceptible to it. I call this move, “exempt by contempt.”

        2. Nope, the debt increased on Clinton’s watch too.

        3. The debt never decreased under Clinton.

          1. fair enough but for one brief second the budget was balanced…so the question posed was not actually about debt….

            1. The budget is nothing more than expected spending vs expected revenue. You dont always get expected revenue, but expected spending is codified in appropriations.

              On top of that you may have heard of this thing called the dot com bubble that happened after and affected that revenue part.

  7. When does the free college budget balance? When does the Medicare for all budget balance?

    Trump has been a big spender so far. American voters want big spending, so there’s not much else that can be done. If it has to catch up with us, better that it happens to a rich America than a poor America.

    1. When do the tax cuts rich elitist Californians like me received from Dear Leader balance?

      1. When do you pay what you owe, scumbag?

      2. AmSoc. You aren’t rich. You can’t even pay the mortgage on your refrigerator box. You embarrass yourself more than usual with obvious like like this.

        You should just get it over with and kill yourself.

  8. God, I hate these articles that are inconsistent with the principle of giving Dear Leader a nice warm soapy reacharound for Libertarianism. So bad!

  9. I much prefer these types of articles where the writers are unapologetic about criticisms of federal spending and power to the ones like what we just saw with the Buttigieg article where the writers contort themselves to find positive things to say about the idiots representing us (or attempting to represent us).

  10. Sure, more money for an already bloated military and less money going back to the citizens.

    “Libertarians” delude themselves thinking Republicans are any better than Dems.

    1. +1

      I suppose the R’s are slightly better at not trying to double the size of government like M4A, free education, etc … but they certainly aren’t actually fiscally conservative. They shouldn’t be praised as not being as bad…they should simply be ridiculed for being bad.

      1. Neither are good. The only real difference is that the Republicans want to fund things that just spend the money but don’t do much else and cut things like the EPA that do damage beyond just wasting money. The Democrats want to fun anything and everything that will control people’s lives and do damage in addition to the money spent.

        1. If there weren’t a significant amount of progressives, it would be easy to counter bad republicans.

          Progressives really are to blame.

    2. Well, at least the military is clearly a federal government responsibility, at least according to that useless piece of parchment from all those old dead white guys.

    3. and less money going back to the citizens
      Shheesh! How about less money going to the government to begin with.

    4. So you think soldiers are not citizens? And you dont understand how much more is spent on entitlements vs military?

      1. Yes they are of course.

        The military budget is too high. A robust lethal defense force does not need to be this large and let us not pretend the money is not going into many pockets of contractors, lobbyists, politicians, and industry. Not the soldiers.

        It is entirely separate from what we call entitlements which are for the most part not entitlements at all. It is mostly money forcibly paid forward by workers and employers into a crappy retirement system from which government workers are exempt.

        1. So it is contractors who are not citizens then?

          And no, you dont get to pick and choose what counts and what doesnt.

          1. WHO gets to decide what counts and doesn’t count?

            Trump the Father, JesseSPAZ the Son, and the Holy Republican Church!

            Jesse favors the Trumptatorship above all else! CERTAINLY above the USA Constitution!

            “He can fire political appointees for any fucking reason he wants.”

            Jesse’s over-archingly lusting after the super-powers of the Trumptorship YET AGAIN!!!
            Trump can fire them for not assigning their entire paychecks to Trump… For not licking Trump’s balls as much as JesseSPAZ does… For turning down Trump’s requests for then to perform personal murder-for-hire… For having fucked Stormy Daniels out of turn, when it was Trump’s turn…

            Just when I was rooting for JesseSPAZ to turn from his evil ways, he doubles down on Trumptatorship-worship AGAIN!

            Jesse will NEVER admit error in ANY way! Jesse is PERFECT, just like Trump!

        2. “”A robust lethal defense force does not need to be this large and let us not pretend the money is not going into many pockets of contractors, lobbyists, politicians, and industry. Not the soldiers.”‘

          All the above are citizens.

          However, I do agree the military budget is too high. It a product of being the world’s police. Removing troops from overseas and reducing our commitment with NATO would allow a reduction. But the neo-cons and liberals don’t want that.

        3. If you can cut the defense budget without hurting the soldiers, go for it. But unfortunately, we never cut out the contractors, politicians, lobbyist, congressionally mandated waste, etc. We cut troops, equipment, training etc instead. So we have troops who have been deployed more often then they have been at home over the past 18 years, because we lack troop numbers to cover all the missions congress and the past presidents have demanded. We have more casualties from suicide then from actual combat, because our troops are at their breaking point. We have equipment that is so worn out that it has caused the death of servicemembers using it.Ending the endless wars will be nice, but that isn’t an instantaneous action. It takes months, years to draw down safely. And the Taliban will likely increase, rather then decrease attacks if we announce a withdrawal without a peace treaty with them. This is based upon their past actions. When we have closed down COP in Afghanistan, the SOP is for the Taliban to try and overrun them, to claim that they ran the US out. These have resulted in high casualty numbers. We cannot withdraw safely from Afghanistan without a peace treaty or at least a cease fire the Taliban will actually honor. The ANA is not adequate to provide coverage for us as we withdraw. It isn’t as simple as getting on an airplane and everyone going home at the drop of a hat. In fact, it will probably cost more to withdraw troops then maintaining combat operations.

  11. the cuts should be 10 or even 20 times bigger.

    1. The first cut should be the deepest.

      1. Incrementalism got us here. Maybe incremental cuts are the answer.

        Unfortunately, time is not on our side. As Millennials, Gen Zers, and whatever new kids will be called, get used to massive national debt and massive federal budgets, they wont know the difference.

  12. “Trump’s budget”? What is this thing called “Trump’s budget”?
    Gentlemen, I give you the US Constitution; “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.”
    So there is no such thing as a president’s budget. The budget, surplus or deficit, is entirely the responsibility of the legislative branch.

    1. Exactly. And this will be the last time anyone says anything about a president’s budget around here.

      1. Well no you’re never going to stop crying like you did there.

  13. Quelle suprise, a moron at Reason thinks that control of both branches of Congress means a simple majority. Pay attention shit for brains, ever since the Democrats changed the nature of the filibuster in the 70’s control of both houses from a legislative perspective requires a 60 vote bloc. Which, IIRC, neither party has had since.

  14. “The White House proposes to cut spending by $4.4 trillion over a decade. Of that, it targets $2 trillion in savings from mandatory spending programs, including $130 billion from changes to Medicare prescription-drug pricing, $292 billion from safety-net cuts—such as work requirements for Medicaid and food stamps—and $70 billion from tightening eligibility access to disability benefits.

    The budget would lower future spending from where it would be under current policy.”


    . . . and it cuts the EPA’s budget by 26%, too?!

    Work requirements for food stamps and Medicaid?!

    Wow. Was Ron Paul elected president last night or something?

    Boehm’s piece hardly even mentioned Trump’s budget slashing entitlement spending–but it doesn’t mention restrictions on eligibility at all.

    1. They dont like either Paul now here.

    2. Right but youre an idiot and a liar

  15. “On the campaign trail in 2016, President Donald Trump promised to eliminate the national debt in eight years. ”

    Did he, though?

    “In April 2016, Trump told The Washington Post, “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion debt.” And he believed he could make that happen in a relatively compressed time frame. “I think I could do it fairly quickly,” he said. How quickly? “I would say over a period of eight years.” ”

    That’s hardly a “promise”…

    1. Strange that when you search for the actual statements in one of these “TRUMP PROMISED!!!” stories, you often find what you did there.

      1. Because those shrill statements are made by lying moronic faggots like Squirrelly, Shreek, Hihn, AmSoc, Pedo Jeffy, etc..

        1. You left out a couple of Reason writers, CNN, MSNBC, PBS and others, but yes.

  16. As soon as there is a risk of the Gov’t coming into Democratic hands, the right wing starts worrying about deficits

    The reason the gov’t is not in better fiscal shape is the ridiculous tax cuts

    having a trump budget would mean trump could understand or maybe spell budget, neither of which is likely

    1. Yes yes, massive tax increases are always great for the economy.

    2. Yeah, it’s those pesky tax cuts causing all of the federal government’s debt and deficit problems. If Trump hadn’t cut tax rates, we would be fine today. Please….

      1. The fact is the tax cuts were unnecessary as the economy was doing very well. The tax cut have had little effect on the economy and so the deficit spending to make those cuts was a needless increase in the debt.

        1. Go fuck yourself for thinking how much of my money is neccessary for me to keep.

        2. The fact is the tax cuts were unnecessary as the economy was doing very well. The tax cut have had little effect on the economy and so the deficit spending to make those cuts was a needless increase in the debt.

          The fact is that federal tax revenues increased after the tax cuts.

          So explain that, genius.

        3. “Tax cuts were unnecessary”?!! First, this is a strange thing to read on a Libertarian website. Second, considering the state of the economy now and immediately after the tax cuts, I don’t know how you can claim that they weren’t beneficial?

        4. “The fact is the tax cuts were unnecessary as the economy was doing very well….”


      2. Hey now. Let’s all ignore reality and the fact tax revenue went up. That is the government’s money god damnit.

    3. “…The reason the gov’t is not in better fiscal shape is the ridiculous tax cuts…”


    4. “The reason the gov’t is not in better fiscal shape is the ridiculous tax cuts ”

      Good grief how can someone be this dumb? The Federal govt is literally taking the highest percentage of GDP from the economy of all time. Highest all time tax revenues as well. But yeah, it’s not the spending that’s a problem. nooooooooo. It’s the 3% reduction to tax rates of the middle fucking class.

      1. baloney

        you cannot simultaneously complain of deficits and cut taxes

        apparently you can be this dumb

        1. “…you cannot simultaneously complain of deficits and cut taxes…”

          And abysmally stoooopid besides.
          Fuck off and die.

        2. “you cannot simultaneously complain of deficits and cut taxes”

          Of course we can dumbass. There are other variables lololol

        3. Spending is out of control and no amount of revenue increase can fix that. The deficit is and always has been a function of gross revenue.

          Giving them more of your money will not, EVER, reduce the debt. I’m sorry to have to break it to you.

        4. “you cannot simultaneously complain of deficits and cut taxes”

          That’s like saying a Mcdonalds employee who accumulates over 5,000 dollars in credit card debt a month can never have his salary slashed because that would increase the deficit in his household budget. And if his pay went up 20 bucks a month that would hardly make a dent in the deficit.

          The deficit isn’t growing because we’re not collecting enough reveneue. It’s growing because we spend way more than we have and enact future spending on top of that.

          1. edit – 20 bucks an hour

  17. this will be the last time anyone says anything about a president’s budget around here. Visit thegurugyaan.com!

  18. Presidents propose budgets, but Congress typically declare them Dead On Arrival. The real problem regarding the deficit and national debt has less to do with whatever President we have, but more with how poor the Legislative branch is at addressing either the deficit or national debt.

    Perhaps Eric Boehn should write an article about how the Legislative branch is failing to address the deficit and national debt instead of simply attacking a President that is simply submitting a budget proposal that will be tossed aside by roughly 1/2 the members of the Legislative branch any.

  19. Jumping Fucking Chickens, Broheim, it’s not Trump’s fault. There’s literally nothing he can do. And knowing that Congress is going to shitcan whatever he sends along, he might as well just submit a budget for $4 trillion for Big Macs for the next ten years.

  20. When the republican actually proposes spending cuts even though they’re chump change, Reason says “Trump’s proposal would cut the federal deficit from over $1 trillion in the current fiscal year to a mere $966 billion next year—nearly 50 percent higher than the $666 billion deficit Trump inherited from President Barack Obama in 2017.”

    When the democrat simply talks about debt being a thing that should maybe be considered: Reason says “Still, at this point, even a small nod to fiscal responsibility from the 2020 candidates feels like weekend. And Buttigieg is now a top-tier candidate.”

    Meanwhile Reason editors were seriously considering voting for Bloomberg. Hey Reason, you did hear that Buttigieg is a big fan of a public option for health care, right? If he’s elected, a “mere $966 billion” will be the least of our problems.

    I wish journalists actually asked questions, challenged people… or literally did anything at all to fulfill their actual role in the Republic. I don’t have a problem with this article by itself, but in the context of this morning’s Roundup… it just looks stupid. Its hard to have any respect for this publication.

  21. Just saw a news clip of Crazy Bernie doing that finger-wagging, orchestra-conducting, spastic-arm-flailing, angry-man-yelling-at-clouds thing as he denounced the results of the Iowa caucus on the grounds that he had 6,000 more votes than anybody else in the first round and where he comes from the person with the most votes is the winner. Which raises the questions of whether he’s so senile/crazy/stupid that he didn’t realize Iowa is like a totally different place than where he comes from and whether he’s so crazy/stupid/incompetent that he didn’t bother finding out the voting procedure and didn’t realize there was more than one round of voting before declaring a winner or if he’s so cynical about the stupidity of his supporters that he fully expects to get some traction from the Hillary Clinton “nobody ever told me about this electrical college thing” strategy of arguing that he would have been the winner if the scoring rules were different.

    1. He probably thinks the World Series should be won by the team with the most total runs – – – – – –

      1. Equally distribute the total runs at the end of the season to all teams. Participation trophies for all.

        Who won the World Series? We all did.

  22. Total Federal Revenue (2020 is estimated):
    2016: $3.27T
    2020: $3.64T

    “Mandatory”* Spending (2020 is estimated):
    2016: $2.43T
    2020: $2.84T

    *Includes Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other legislatively-mandated programs

    As you can see, the growth in entitlements alone as outpaced revenue growth. A filibuster-proof congressional majority would be required to trim these programs. That hasn’t existed for a long time.

    Blaming the current administration for not reducing the deficit requires a desire to raise taxes, which should inspire a different libertarian critique, though I start to wonder if Reason would make it.

  23. “And Trump, despite his outsider status, has quickly acclimated to the consensus political view that fixing the national debt will have to be the next president’s problem.”

    And November 2020 is the time to pick that next president.

    1. And how much is Bernie Sanders or Pete Buttigieg suggesting we cut from the budget?

      1. History tells us we get deficit reductions when the President is a Democrat and at least one house of Congress is Republican. So I would expect deficit reduction under a President Sanders or a President Buttigieg if the Senate remains in Republican control.

        1. And how many of those Democrats were open socialists?

          So I would expect deficit reduction under a President Sanders or a President Buttigieg if the Senate remains in Republican control.

          Well that’s pretty naïve of you, considering that the candidate most likely to fit that mold (Biden) is getting crushed in the Democratic primary and the front-running candidates are campaigning on literally every far left issue that Democrats from the period you’re describing ran away from.

          When a socialist tells you they plan to tax the crap out of you and blow up government spending, as well as implement all sorts of regulations to control your life, you’re a fool not to believe them.

        2. Do you honestly believe this?

        3. None of that reduction is due to the president being a democrat dumbfuck. It has to do with Republican opposition. And since 2009 the gop has been too cowardly to oppose the spending increases. See paul ryan.

          1. Republican opposition to the Trumptatorship is THE biggest EVIL according to JesseSPAZ! The Trumptatorship should be (is according to JesseSPAZ fantasy) unbounded, without limits, infinite! FAR greater than the USA Constitution!

            “He is not constitutionally bound on any actions he performed.”
            Reminds me of ol’ Prez Clinton and “there is no controlling legal authority above me”. Clinton-Gore logic!
            “Gore had no real defense, so he trotted out a phony one: There was, he infamously claimed, “no controlling legal authority.” What he meant was that there weren’t many court decisions interpreting the meaning of Section 607. It was laughable. The rule of thumb for judges, as for the rest of us, is that laws are construed to mean what they say, the ordinary, everyday understanding of the words. ”
            Plain written laws and Constitutional writings don’t mean what they say, unless JesseSPAZ agrees with them. Otherwise, he’ll trot out some Al-Gore-like bullshit, and then skitter away.

          2. “And since 2009 the gop has been too cowardly to oppose the spending increases.” <– There it is!!!

            We see it every time the budget gets proposed. Republicans offer major cuts that the Democrats won't pass and then the GOP caves in to move the budget forward instead of just shutting the whole outfit down permanently.

  24. ?I’am made $84, 8254 so far this year working on the web and I’m a full time understudy. Im utilizing an online business opportunity I caught wind of and I’AM profited. It’s truly easy to understand and I’m simply so cheerful that I got some answers concerning it. Here what I do,.for more data essentially open this connection thank you
    ……. Read more

  25. And how much are the Democrats offering to cut from the budget?

  26. Republicans want to spend money on things that blow up and make rich guys richer
    Democrats want to spend money on things that make poor people less poor
    There is no one proposing a fiscally prudent path forward, pretending there is; Sophistry

    1. Republicans want to spend money on things that blow up and make rich guys richer

      Considering that the State and Local Tax cap absolutely nailed wealthy people in ultra-rich states, I think we can say that this is complete bullshit. In fact, part of Pelosi’s anger is that tax bill on her $25 million vineyard in Napa that she can no longer deduct because it far exceeds the cap. Her tax bill now exceeds her income as a legislator.

      Democrats want to spend money on things that make poor people less poor

      Actually, they want to blow money on fraudulent “green” energy companies run by political cronies and stick taxpayers with the bill when those businesses tank. If you don’t get that Democrats are the party of corporations, you simply haven’t been paying attention and you probably need to do that rather than resorting to outdated stereotypes and lazy high school–level cynicism.

      1. Dems have little problem passing regressive taxes.

        When the congestion pricing plan for NYC rolls out, a poor person with a car will not be able to drive below 96th street in Manhattan without becoming poorer.

        Liberals are big about using taxes as a way to force behavior change. That makes poor people either obedient, or poorer.

        1. Don’t forget the lefts war on Walmart, or discount Dollar stores, big boxes they don’t approve of. The poor and middle class in lefturban utopias c save around 30-50% on food, basic staples if the left cities would allow Walmart to come in. Democrats say “NO”.

    2. arpiniant1
      February.10.2020 at 2:20 pm
      “Republicans want to spend money on things that blow up and make rich guys richer
      Democrats want to spend money on things that make poor people less poor…”

      arpiniant wants for prove how fucking stupid a commenter can be. And s/he’s succeeding.
      Fuck off, slaver.

    3. Congrats. You win the new leftist dumbfuck of the day award.

      1. Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!

  27. Is a balanced federal budget necessarily good? No. Is federal deficit spending necessarily bad? No. Does the federal debt matter? Yes – but let’s not forget that in our system – a fiat currency system, the big risk in harmful inflation (and what that would do to our living standards). Luckily, we have the world’s largest, most dynamic economy (for now), so I don’t see the world rejecting our currency. When interest rates on new issue Treasury bills, notes, and bond shoot way, way up – we’ll be in deep shit – because that’s how the world will share its lack of confidence in our system. In the mean time, let’s keep the growth fairy going. It will buy more time to reduce the size of the federal government. Oh – and don’t ever elect somebody like Elizabeth Warren. Should that somehow happen, don’t let her enact her long list of fantasy policy initiatives, like wealth taxes, banning fracking, ending right-to-work laws, the Green New Deal, etc. — those policies will cause great damage to our economy.

  28. “Over the course of the next decade, Trump’s budget”

    In the next decade “Trump’s budget” won’t even exist. If he gets a second term, he will be in office for an additional 4 years. Another Congress, another President, could change everything.

    None of this gets fixed until there are some serious reductions in federal spending. Start be eliminating wasteful and useless programs and agencies.

    1. And no one in Congress or the White House, not D or R, are even talking about real spending reductions.

    2. You could try some legislation that would cut a small percent across all budget lines.

  29. Typical politician behavior. “My budget balances spending, but only after I’m dead.” Which means, never.

  30. There is no politician or anyone else in the DC Swamp that wants a balanced budget. That nonsense is totally out the window. If they cannot even get close to a balanced budget after years of record revenues, it is never going to happen and certainly not before 2035. By 2035, this country is not even going to exist as it is now. The world’s financial system will have been blown apart by then. Once Trump leaves office, be it 2020 or 2024, the Marxist Dems will be in control and deficits will soar beyond anyone’s imagination.

    1. ValVerde1867, WHERE is your crystal ball?

      HERE is MINE:

      Late 2020: National debt = 120% of GNP. Donald Trump easily wins re-election by promising a large budget for a new Department of Disputing Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Ancestry, and for Making the Liberals Cry.

      2024: National debt = 130% of GNP. Elizabeth Warren is elected POTUS; She promised a large budget for a new Department for Making the GOP-tards Cry. Elon Musk’s projects are fabulously successful, and Americans are emigrating en masse to Mars. Given the choice of either continuing to pay hideously large fees to the USA IRS, or renouncing America citizenship, the Martians pay $15,000 each to renounce America citizenship, but even the millions of Martian-American exit fees are like micro-farts in a hurricane… They make no difference in the national debt!

      2028: National debt = 150% of GNP. New POTUS Bernie Sanders wins by promising free health care and PhD educations for everyone who can spell the word “free”, plus, a free pony for everyone under 15 years of age. Some USA states are getting ready to split off of the USA, and renounce their “fair” share of the USA debt. Hispanic illegal humans are scrambling for the exits back south, as most employable Americans seek black-market low-wage jobs to escape exorbitant taxes.

      2032: National debt = 230% of GNP. All states have split off of the USA, leaving behind only Washington, DC, with the entire national debt. DC promptly declares bankruptcy. All states with nuclear-weapons bases, having very well learned from Ukraine having given up its share of USSR nukes, and getting invaded by Russia later on, have kept their own nukes.

      2036: Montana and Wyoming unite, feeling a patriotic urge to restore the united USA towards its former fully Glory Days. In a quest for military glory, they have a full-scale nuclear exchange with California. The USA’s needs have now been met: Both the liberals AND the conservatives are forced to cry!

  31. The problem is this. No matter what budget the President of the United States submits, it is the congress that appropriates funds. Nazi Pelosi will, with no question whatsoever, declare any budget (or any other document for that matter) that President Trump delivers to be “dead on arrival” and then she and the clowns of her party will prepare a budget which McConnell will declare “dead on arrival” and the government will continue to stumble drunkenly toward bankruptcy under yet more continuing resolutions.

    1. In some ways this is a good thing though. Perhaps the founders meant this to be a contradictive deadlock system. If they cannot pass a budget – they certainly cannot keep growing the government.

  32. It’ll be interesting to see what happens if we get a R majority in the House and Senate, along with Trump’s reelection.
    It’s easy to appeal to the “both sidesism” when talking about the budget, because it’s so fun to virtue signal as “independent” and “above” partisan thoughts.
    But we all know the Ds will spend as much as they can conceive of. They don’t even try to hide this.
    Unfortunately, the Rs don’t have a very good record in recent times either.
    Newton did pretty good, but that was 26 years ago. Bush was a progressive, then lost Congress to the Ds. The Rs won it back in 2010, and forced Obama to reduce the deficit to an extent (didn’t stop him from adding $9 trillion to the debt though).
    Trump won in 2016, with Rs retaining control of both Houses. Unfortunately Paul Ryan, another progressive, was uncooperative and the Rs lost the House in 2018.
    Is McCarthy a progressive? Doesn’t seem like it.
    So might the Rs actually do something about the budget with Trump in office and a friendlier House under R control?
    I don’t know… but it’s possible.

  33. The real problem with that budget is that it doesn’t provide enough freebies for the illegal aliens who cut the lawns of reason’s staff.

  34. When it comes to budgets, democrats can’t add, and republicans only pretend they can when a democrat is in office.

    The budget will never balance without a default, and republicans don’t care any more than democrats don’t. They both pander to the same corporate donor base.

  35. I am making a good salary from home $1200-$2500/week , which is amazing, under a year back I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone, Here is what I do. Follow details on this web page…..Read MoRe

  36. “Despite $4.4 Trillion in Spending Cuts, Trump’s Budget Won’t Balance Until 2035 And whether it balances at all depends on some creative accounting. Meanwhile, it proposes $2 billion in new spending on the border wall.”

    What clowns.

    4,400 billion of cuts, and they’re whining about 2 billion more for the Wall.

    I think they’re tired of America winning.

  37. OK, Boehm, put on your Big Boy pants and show us your spending plan, after trying to destroy President Trump’s plans.

  38. Isn’t the lefties arguments in this comment section so awesome….
    1) Democrat will give “people” money.
    2) Tax-cuts are the reason we cannot give “people” money.
    The beautiful CONTROL model.. STEAL from the people first with big Tax-hikes then pretend to be “giving” in return a small portion of their money.

    My name is robin-hood; I steal from people, take 50% or better, then return the other 50% and pretend I’m a saint.

  39. Hi Dear,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,wanda

    This is enoug for me to Earn money at home on laptop ,Just work on laptop 4 to 6 hour par day and Make 50 Dollar Easily This is very nyc for me and my family…..

    Check It Here…. Here is More information

  40. Hi…
    I am Elena gillbert.President Donald Trump’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2021 would reduce the size and reach of the federal bureaucracy significantly by shifting government responsibilities back to constitutional priorities and empowering state and local governments.
    you can also read more…click here http://klantenservicebelgies.emyspot.com/blog/hoe-epson-printer-error-code-w-12-te-repareren.html

  41. All those dates are close to never

  42. This is enoug for me to Earn money at home on laptop ,Just work on laptop 4 to 6 hour par day and Make 50 Dollar Easily This is very nyc for me and my family….. Read more

  43. Trump started with other people’s money (his dad’s), screwed people repeatedly in business dealings and walked away laughing, and he is just continuing business as usual. Most politicians are narcissistic, and are unable to accept the consequences of their actions, always blaming others, or loading burdens on them (taxpayers in this case) without a second thought. Bernie and Elizabeth are basically the same animals, just a different presentation.

  44. We’ll never get out of this mess without wholesale gutting of the government… But people are too dumb/comfortable for it now. It will take a major crisis before we will ever straighten shit out. At least he’s throwing out proposed cuts that will never happen… Do you know what the budget would have looked like with Hag or Sanders in there???

  45. Google pay 350$ reliably my last pay check was $45000 working 9 hours out of consistently on the web. My increasingly youthful kinfolk mate has been averaging 19k all through continuous months and he works around 24 hours reliably…… Read more  

  46. Google pay 350$ reliably my last pay check was $45000 working 9 hours out of consistently on the web. My increasingly youthful kinfolk mate has been averaging 19k all through continuous months and he works around 24 hours reliably… Read more  

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.