Changes

This increase in the ratio was due to the elimination of the debt ceiling and an increase in debt of about $800 billion (which is a higher rate of new debt in proportion to GDP in three months than for the entire fiscal year 2005 or 2006 at the height of the Iraq War) and a large slowdown in GDP growth just recently being indicated by a large stock market correction.

This increase in the ratio was due to the elimination of the debt ceiling and an increase in debt of about $800 billion (which is a higher rate of new debt in proportion to GDP in three months than for the entire fiscal year 2005 or 2006 at the height of the Iraq War) and a large slowdown in GDP growth just recently being indicated by a large stock market correction.

In those three months, whatever the results of any tax increases put into law for current spending, the U.S. Government has committed itself to ''four percent of the size of today's entire U.S. economy'' over and above that.

In those three months, whatever the results of any tax increases put into law for current spending, the U.S. Government has committed itself to ''four percent of the size of today's entire U.S. economy'' over and above that amount.

If you are preparing a budget with a competitor for resources, you would probably be willing to haggle over spending on various items in the range of one-half to one percent.  If there were a built-in increase of four percent on your competitor's side, the haggling would become something of a farce.  If you successfully argue for a one percent advantage, your competitor can loudly complain of his cut (while netting three percent) and win sympathy, because the four percent, through sleight of hand, isn't part of the competitive process and happened "at some other time".

If you are preparing a budget with a competitor for resources, you would probably be willing to haggle over spending on various items in the range of one-half to one percent.  If there were a built-in increase of four percent on your competitor's side, the haggling would become something of a farce.  If you successfully argue for a one percent advantage, your competitor can loudly complain of his cut (while netting three percent) and win sympathy, because the four percent, through sleight of hand, isn't part of the competitive process and happened "at some other time".

The taxpayer arguing for lower taxes is like you in the example:  he or she might get a publicized one percent tax cut out of the budget while four percent over the budget has already been spent.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 19:01, 8 January 2016 (EST)

The taxpayer arguing for lower taxes is like you in the example:  he or she might get a publicized one percent tax cut out of the budget while four percent over the budget has already been spent.  [[User:VargasMilan|VargasMilan]] ([[User talk:VargasMilan|talk]]) 19:01, 8 January 2016 (EST)