Slashdot Mirror
President Trump's Budget Includes a $2 Trillion Math Error (time.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TIME: President Trump's budget includes a simple accounting error that adds up to a $2 trillion oversight. Under the proposed budget released Tuesday, the Trump Administration's proposed tax cuts would boost economic growth enough to pay for $1.3 trillion in spending by 2027. But the tax cuts are also supposed to be revenue-neutral, meaning that trillion dollars is already supposed to pay for the money lost from the tax cuts. Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers called the oversight an "elementary double count" and "a logical error of the kind that would justify failing a student in an introductory economics course" in an op-ed in the Washington Post.
Like everything else from this administration, it's a lie. We don't have a functioning democracy any more because we don't have an informed public, sadly.
I don't respond to AC's.
Hanlon's Razor applies here. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
You guys are so picky, c'mon. Math is hard.
You are welcome on my lawn.
If the Bush/Obama tax cuts were fully repealed, it would restore $4T in tax revenues for a decade that could fix the hole in the budget. Those tax cuts never paid for themselves.
Stop BSing yourself. We don't have a functioning democracy?
Like sanctuary cities that think they're above the law?
Like the federal government under Obama not enforcing immigration laws on the books.
These things are dangerous - and I'm a proponent of immigration - but make it legal and on the f**king books.
The Trump administration has done nothing counter to Constitution.
And in case it matters I didn't vote for the orange oompa lumpa.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Disagree. This is malicious; intentional. Trump isn't stupid.
this is the president you deserve though
This is all just part of Trump's Alternative Math program.
Partially disagree. It's malicious but that doesn't mean Trump isn't stupid too.
Hanlon's Razor applies here. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.
Gray's Law also applies [1].
"Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
At some point the buck stops, and incomp etence is no excuse. Do you not think the buck stops with the POTUS? It doesn't matter if it's on purpose or a mistake - trillions of dollars of error should result in some firings.
[1] http://joshuabrauer.com/2007/0...
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
The Trump administration has done nothing counter to Constitution.
That remains to be seen. There's this thing in the Constitution called the Emoluments clause that restricts members of the government from receiving gifts, emoluments, offices or titles from foreign states without the consent of the United States Congress. Trump maintains, through at least his family members and a paper-thin revocable trust, a LOT of property interests (hotels, resorts, golf courses, vacation homes) that rich foreigners can dump money into in return for a little kind attention from Herr Donald.
He still hasn't released his tax returns either (is he still being audited, not that that means anything), which might show substantial financial obligations to foreign stake-holders (there's a lot of borrowing that goes on in the real-estate business).
Then there's this little matter of involvement of a foreign power in the matter of an election, and obstruction of justice for trying to cover up any link to that foreign power.
Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
I consider a math error of that magnitude better than I dunno.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
... when a democrat is in the white house. Don't act surprised!!!
Calm down, people, we don't want a fight here. Let's put aside our differences and try for the possibility of lasting peach on this site.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
This math error basically doesn't matter. 1.3 trillion seems like a lot for a mistake, but that's like arguing with the magician who's just accidentally dropped a card out of his sleeve. Does it really matter whether it was a card from the deck or an extra copy of a card? It's still a magic trick. The whole proposal is built on poor estimates and pipe dreams with little or no supporting evidence. Admittedly, it's still a pretty big math error. I wonder if someone forgot to renew the license on the spreadsheet software at the White House and they had to break out the pencils and slide rules?
I disagree. I think Trump is a complete idiot. He can't make a statement over two sentences long that doesn't become a rambling filler-filled pile of nothing that is also impossible to parse. My belief is that he's suffering from dementia, but whatever the cause, the man is a moron. Now Reagan was a moron too, but at least he surrounded himself with some fairly rational individuals, and that's fine, no one expects a President to actually personally run every branch of the Government. But now you have someone probably mid-way through a serious cognitive decline who still believes he's some sort of super-genius.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
...soon you'll be talking real money.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
TRUMP: We're gonna have the biggest math errors! Way better and bigger errors than the democrats!! Nobody makes math errors better than me, believe me. No one's every had more than a trillion dollar math error. They said it couldn't be done. I'm really smart - I went to the Wharton School of Finance. We're gonna have errors more than, more, er, than TWO TRILLION DOLLARS!
From your own link, HUD made lots of errors in both directions totalling $500 billion. The actual effect was $3 million. They should check their work better, but the HUD audit is entirely different.
Can't you people leave him alone for a single day? He finished up his orb business, then left the middle east to arrive at Israel, had a great time at the Holocaust museum and randomly decided to confess to outing an Israeli spy in front of Netanyahu - but all you people can do is make fun of his tiny, tiny hands.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
Don't just claim it, prove it. Cite where you criticized an accounting error and were called a racist for it.
For that matter, also show that your cited error in the same linked post was accurate.
You're treating a symptom while the disease rages on. The fish rots from the head. Why not cut off the head?
You're right, math is hard. But way too many people who call themselves conservatives round-off whatever errors they get by claiming the economy will magically, dramatically, improve and wipe out their mistakes. According to TFA:
According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, for Trump's tax cuts to pay for themselves, the economy would have to grow at 4.5 percent over the next 10 years. That's two and a half times the growth rate projected by the Congressional Budget Office.
That's always what these idiots do. Release the mythical tax strangle-hold on America's super-rich, and all the cuts to the safety net and spending for the military will magically be paid off, because the newly freed super-rich will invest their wealth and the whole country will soar like a pig full of hot air.
Conservatives who don't think very hard fall for this sucker-play because, to them, it's never been done, and it's waiting to happen, just begging to happen, and when it happens, it'll just totally work, and it'll be so great. Of course, nobody's holding a gun to the heads of rich people to do right with their tax relief and create jobs jobs jobs in America... they could spend it all overseas (a little more bang for the buck, there), spend it on yachts, spend it on cocaine... there's a lot of ways money can get spent... or not spent at all. Sunny-days, trickle-down budgets work just as well as Daddy's plan to move you into a nice house as soon as he wins his money back at the racetrack.
It's not a math error. It's a scam.
Take it easy, Charlie, I've got an Angle...
One mistake is a million times larger than the other. A little beyond tomato-tomahto differences.
Seriously? You are accusing the left of petty insults, when you idiots have Donald Trump, who was fucking EMBRACED by the right because of his petty insults towards his opponents?
Like sanctuary cities that think they're above the law?
Actually, the vast majority of sanctuary cities are within the law, even by Trump's standards.
Like the federal government under Obama not enforcing immigration laws on the books.
It is well within the powers of the President to prioritize law enforcement, especially immigration. It's not like deportations dropped suddenly under Obama. Would you rather deport X felons or X/2 felons + X/2 otherwise innocent people? This kind of thing happens all the time at every level of government. District Attorneys don't prosecute every case that comes in front of them, they have to prioritize. Would you claim a cop is "not enforcing the traffic laws" because they choose not to pull over a speeder while on their way to a homicide? Probably not.
The Trump administration has done nothing counter to Constitution.
Well not successfully at least. Federal judges from all over the country found enough of a Constitutional issue in Trump's travel bans to warrant indefinite injunctions until the cases are settled (assuming the Administration still intends to fight them at all).
Keep in mind, the Administration didn't try to justify the bans in court, but instead claimed that they didn't have to provide justification. From the 9th Circuit Ruling (source):
[T]he government has taken the position that the president’s decisions about immigration policy, particularly when motivated by national security concerns, are unreviewable, even if those actions potentially contravene constitutional rights and protections. ... There is no precedent to support this claimed unreviewability, which runs contrary to the fundamental structure of our constitutional democracy.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
You don't understand. When Republicans/Conservatives/Righties do it, it's noble and bravely challenging rampant over political correctness. When Democrats/Liberals/Lefties do it, it's proof that they're all evil monsters.
Aww, that's sweet that you think he wrote that himself, especially as two days before that Turkish thugs were kicking US citizens on US soil in the face for exercising their Constitutional right to protest.
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
Yeah, but Trump is both malicious and stupid.
I really think we should give peas a chance.
Whirled Peas is the answer.
No, when "republicans/conservatives/righties" get caught cheating on their wives, get outed as gay, or it comes out they are drug addicts they look like hypocritical douche bags.
When "democrats/liberals/lefties" get caught being racist, sexist, homophobic, name callers they look like hypocritical douche bags.
Anytime anyone gets caught blatantly behaving in the opposite manner that they profess to be their "core values", they look like a lying ass. It doesn't matter if they are left, right or center.
Because you cut tax rates while you spend a defined amount. Tax revenue is determined by the tax rates and the amount and size of revenue sources. If the economy grows fast enough, revenue will increase with reduced tax rates.
I didn't say he was illiterate. He does reasonably well with prepared statements.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Whirled Peas are the answer.
Yes, exactly!
(this message may have been filtered by the Grammar Police).
I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
I'm aware of how the Laffer curve works, but most reputable economic studies show the top of the curve is at around a 60% top marginal tax rate. Anything lower than that and you are losing revenue. In any case, I am just going by what the budget itself claims. It counts the same two trillion twice, read the articles, it's a basic math error.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Doesn't matter, Trump doesn't write the proposed budget personally. Hopefully he at least reviews the budget, but he's certainly not sitting there with a calculator and green eyeshades.
Ural nuts.
It's not a filler-filled pile, it's just full of fiber*.
(*) warning, may contain nuts.
Nothing above the law about sanctuary cities. The federal government can request assistance with immigration enforcement but the local governments are not compelled to cooperate. There is no law that says they must assist the INS on demand.
INS claims (falsely) that they're only focusing on undocumented immigrants if they have committed serious crimes, and in such cases even sanctuary cities cooperate and turn the prisoners over. The case that riled so many against sanctuary cities when an illegal immigrant killed someone in San Francisco, there was no active warrant for the killer and there was no reason to continue detaining him. ICE requested he be detained but there was no legal basis for further detaining. The killer had no history of violent crimes, his deporations were due to drug laws and attempting re-entry to the US.
Now would it have been above the law to detain a person when no charges had been filed, no warrant or evidence presented, but merely because a federal agent asked for this?
Deportations under Obama administration were higher than under any other president, it's really a stretch for some people to call him soft on illegal immigration given the numbers.
Absolutely nothing, because the alleged perpetrator was born in the UK.
Also, don't reference Breitbart as if I'm supposed to take that trash seriously.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
I didn't say he was illiterate. He does reasonably well with prepared statements.
He is good in SQL?
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
You seem to be trying to dance around the issue here: you can't cut a budget if you can't do basic economics (hence the comment about failing a first year for such a mistake). This isn't Trump personally who made the error, but the Trump *cabinet*. So yea, it is a pretty dumb mistake to make but I too disagree with pinning it on him. Though, if he is as tough a businessman as he claims to be, I expect heads to roll.
So I don't get why you make this about him and how he acts and what not. This is just a dumb mistake from someone in his staff and they should be rightfully fired. The man himself makes enough mistakes but this one isn't on him, even though he is ultimately responsible
Trump employs incompetent people to do this stuff for him. He thinks he has great judgement and gets the best people, but his personality, policies and selection process ensure that the exact opposite happens.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
At some point the Trump apologists are going to have to stop deflecting to Clinton. Your guy is in office now, he's the one that you have to defend. Clinton lost the election, therefore isn't worthy of your time. What should be worthy is the constant stream of fuckups and potentially treason coming out of the current administration. You're not in a campaign anymore, you're in government.
Not to mention that Laffer himself repeatedly stated that exploiting the curve to grow revenue is ONLY possible if it's coupled with austerity measures. You can't just cut taxes, you HAVE to cut spending enough to offset it until the growth comes.
The idea is that, at around 60% you could grow revenues over-all by instituting a combination of spending cuts and tax cuts. No republican ever does the spending cuts part - because it's impossible to do the cuts Laffer describes without HUGELY cutting the military budget. Even if you flat out remove EVERYTHING ELSE from the budget it wouldn't be enough without also cutting defense.
Then comes the other factors - generally spending cuts INCREASE deficits and debts because they cost more revenue than they save in expenses (austerity in general is about as sensible as trying to save money on your heating bill by burning your paycheck for warmth). The only time austerity measures can safely be introduced is EXACTLY the opposite of when conservatives tend to push them: during boom times. Cutting spending in a recession is a great way to make the recession worse and the government poorer. You cut spending, if it needs cutting, during boom times when there is enough revenue that you can afford to carry the losses it cause.
So to successfully use the Laffer curve three conditions MUST hold:
1) Marginal tax rates needs to be at the peak of the curve, that's around 60% usually.
2) Spending cuts must match every tax cut
3) It must be during an already-in-progress boom cycle when there's lots of economic growth already happening and you can afford to take a medium term, but severe, shock to the system.
Even then you're likely to trigger a short to medium term recession - you may come out ahead at the end, but make no mistake - getting there is going to be painful. To get the promised holy land you will need to walk barefoot through a field of broken glass.
Republicans however, they don't much care for these facts. They just like to pretend that Laffer said "Tax cuts lead to economic growth which raises revenue" and ignore everything else he said and everything every other economist said so they can keep doing the exact same set of policies they always do - even though they NEVER work, and in fact, consistently produce exactly the outcomes that economists predict: deficits get worse, debts increase, the economy slumps and people suffer.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
And of course, this is why Newt Gingrich can't win re-election after cheating on the fourth spouse in a row... oh wait.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Moron, click the link and then be ashamed of your reactionary idiocy.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
It's a fucking photo mate. Let me guess, snopes crafted the pixels by hand and spread them on the internet to erode faith in your orange hero. Bad, bad people. Sad!
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Slashdot is an echo chamber for triggered special snowflakes these days.
Yes, I'm getting tired of all the whiny Trump supporters too.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The primary goal of government is obviously not to maximize its revenues. However, it's useful to know what sorts of effects taxes will have on the economy and how much tax revenue is likely to change. I've seen enough stupid arguments that cutting taxes increases revenue, with "Laffer curve" used much like a holy invocation.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"Righties"? ...hmmm. While the term "Leftists" is a shibboleth for people who consume conservative talk-show drivel, and I can appreciate turn-about, I have to put forward the proposal to amend it to "TightyRighties".
It's not about revenue at all. The goal is a federal government so weak that "we can drown in a bathtub". If that means bankrupting the federal government, so be it.
The tax cut serves two purposes:
- To hasten the process of dismantling the only power capable of holding the wealthiest Americans in check: the US federal government.
- To further consolidate power into the hands of the wealthiest, whom can then live with complete impunity, as was the case a century ago.
-- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
Extensive legal tax avoidance schemes (which are the ones normally talked about) do not imply that we're on the right side of the curve. They would be used regardless of the position on the curve.