Posted:
#51
Post Deleted
Don't let the book set the number
Still think we are living in a free countryt under Dictator Don
Posted:
#53
@unplucked_gem
What are you talking about? He posted a fabrication, I asked for clarification and I gave context in the following post. What are you even trying to say?
Did you look at the link showing 2023 and 2024 receipts month to month? No of course you did not, just like sundance you are seeking hit and run partisan nonsense. Dont get annoyed when you post something that is false and misleading and then you get called on it.
2024 tax receipts are not due to Trump, but I guess to some of you anything that has a positive spin is about Trump and everything otherwise is due to Biden and the DEMS.
Posted:
#56
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
@sundance Of course you are not willing to spend 10 seconds in finding out that April is tax collection month and there are surplus to the treasury from tax receipts. I knew you did not have the depth of detail because you are not really interested in constructive conversation, rather partisan hit and run nonsense. Your post history proves this point, if asking for clarification to your claim is coming after you then it is probably a good idea that you stop posting in this area given that baseless claims are going to be fact checked on either side. Dont let facts get in the way of your cheerleading- https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts0424.pdf
@sundance Of course you are not willing to spend 10 seconds in finding out that April is tax collection month and there are surplus to the treasury from tax receipts. I knew you did not have the depth of detail because you are not really interested in constructive conversation, rather partisan hit and run nonsense. Your post history proves this point, if asking for clarification to your claim is coming after you then it is probably a good idea that you stop posting in this area given that baseless claims are going to be fact checked on either side. Dont let facts get in the way of your cheerleading- https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts0424.pdf
Bravo 
They do this constantly day in and day out. They post little pieces to try and make them seem right, but leave out the whole facts. Its getting really old now.
Posted:
#58
Quote Originally Posted by unplucked_gem:
just like sundance you are seeking hit and run partisan nonsense. also this is: 1) false. Where did I do this or specify a specific side? 2) offensive. You're attempting to liken me to someone else, their content, or a stretch intent. None of which are accurate. 3) history bias application at its finest. But again, expectations are set low but from a moderator I do expect even the most basic courtesy lest an apology.
just like sundance you are seeking hit and run partisan nonsense. also this is: 1) false. Where did I do this or specify a specific side? 2) offensive. You're attempting to liken me to someone else, their content, or a stretch intent. None of which are accurate. 3) history bias application at its finest. But again, expectations are set low but from a moderator I do expect even the most basic courtesy lest an apology.
What was the purpose for post 52
Posted:
#60
Quote Originally Posted by sundance:
I will offer the following fact regarding the huge surplus in April of 2025. 1. This is the 2nd highest monthly surplus in US history. Again. The monthly surplus to the US Treasury in April of 2025 was a staggering $258B. MAGA!
I will offer the following fact regarding the huge surplus in April of 2025. 1. This is the 2nd highest monthly surplus in US history. Again. The monthly surplus to the US Treasury in April of 2025 was a staggering $258B. MAGA!
Here is the rub and the part you do not include-
Receipts FY2024= 766
Outlay FY2024= 567
Receipts FY2023= 638.5
Outlay FY2023= 462.3
So let us look at year over year changes and make a better more precise analysis. The increase in receipts from 23-24 is 127.5 or about a 20 plus percent more and that is via taxation, the reason you can determine that is looking at previous months year over year and they are not 20% difference for March and Feb (it is right there in the link I provided) and there is no way that the increase came from tariffs even if we go with their claimed tariff figure.
Year over year change in outlays= 104.5 or 22.5%, so the surplus was due to an increase in taxation even to overcome the larger increase in government spending. How is this something to cheer about?
To cheer you would have a decrease in receipts and a decrease in outlays or at least LESS of an increase in outlays relative to the increase in taxation. You want a more efficient and less spending government, isnt that the idea?
Is this too many words for your group, too much analysis and research versus just taking some blurb off a TNC website that looks good?
Come on...just admit you are a Trump fan and not really interested in discussion or making things better, especially when the devil is in the details about the claim.
Posted:
#61
@unplucked_gem
Post 55 #1 asked a question which was a reply I made to post 52...so the answer to your question is for you to give insight as to why you posted 52. Not tough.
You are not required or even invited to reply to this members threads so if you do that means you are open to analysis of your reply and that is exactly what I did. You have a history of baiting this member so maybe if you were not seeking to take yet another poke (as you did) and were seeking conversation then it might not come off the way you always do.
I associate you with your content, your repeated over and over partisan content to antagonize the other side. That is the association, your words and replies.
Hot Forum Topics
