TPS

My point is both sides of the equation are behind the higher deficits. The fact that revenues are 1% < the norm, adds $200 billion to the deficit as you said. While spending is the main driver, lower revenues as a consequence of lower tax rates contributed as well. Looking at the actual $ values, the calendar year 2018 deficit increased by $115 billion over 2017 (Revenues increased by $15 billion and spending increased by $130 billion). Relative to GDP, revenues were 17.2% in 2107 and 16.5% in 2018, so that decrease of 0.7% was equivalent to about $140 billion in lower revenues, all else constant. I'd guess that without the tax cuts, the 2018 deficit probably would've been pretty close to the 2017 value--tax revenues would've been about equal to the spending increase. Going back to 2012, the average increase in revenues was close to $150 bil/year.

For 2018, Revenue is also 1% (of GDP) lower than the historical (CBO data goes back to 1965) average; on the other hand, spending is = to the historical average. And interest payments (as a share of GDP) are still < than the historical average.

Where in the world is Foster?

New piece by A. Mate...

Yes, he plays one of the backer roles and he often is a DL in pas-rushing, but typically interior, not end. I imagine that he could take the end role a few times, with Shaq playing more of the snaps.

Shaq and Lorenzo will split it

Now, now...a forced marriage in one case and Paulson eliminating a competitor in the other. Our admnistration is killing us, so it may not be too far off....

That would be great as long as we get access to the Fed's facilities when defaults become unsustainable, you know, like the banks...

The Chicken or the egg issue. States froze or cut support for HE, especially after the crisis, and unless costs are cut significantly, then the only solution is raising tuition. As tuition has increased dramatically, students need more aid and (all) lenders increase the loan amounts to coincide. Public institutions are still a deal. The largest part of costs are room and board, and from my perspective that is what will drive any backlash. SUNY tuition is $7070/year (+fees), and staying in a dorm costs about $20,000/year. Even if you qualify for a program that covers tuition, the room & board costs are more than most can handle. The issues: 1. Cuts in State support cause public institutions to raise tuition to compensate. 2. Rising administrative overhead has been the biggest driver of costs. Given any budget issues, College Admins hire fewer tenure-track faculty and more adjuncts. 3. Cost reduction in teaching requires raising the student-faculty ratio (watering down the instruction). For the past 20+ years people have argued that online teaching could do this, but it hasn't... yet... Making tuition "free" would help, but that doesn't resolve the room & board issue (nor the bureaucratic bloat). I have a stepson who will go to college next year. We are trying to convince him to go to UB or Canisius, and stay at home. He wants to go to grad school, and our goals is to get him out of his undergrad debt-free so he can take out loans to support that next phase.

The "offending institutions" were wiped out, really? All of them? Citigroup was a healthy institution? Yes, yes...The FED and former GS CEO T-sec Paulson played the bad government man and forced the banks to take handouts. I guess Hank was corrupted once he became a government employee...So the banks were force-fed Tarp funds, but they gladly accepted becoming BHCs to have access to the Fed's window. Again, you want it both ways. Some countries full-on nationalized, and that well could've happened here. But private property....blah, blah, blah...

Awww....the poor little bankers did nothing wrong. I wonder how the poor shareholders would've reacted if the banks were simply allowed to fail? I'm mean, if we're going to cry about "stomping on shareholders' rights" by the heavy hand of the feds, then let's simply let the market work things out.... Finance wants it both ways. Leave us alone when we're making money, but save us when we create out of control bubbles...

They aren't mutually exclusive. The Fed (and TARP) did both--they made sure markets had sufficient liquidity to function AND they bailed out the largest banks by buying up toxic assets at face value, then paying interest on the reserves. The banks then had the hutzpah to offer bonuses for their great management during the crisis....

Yeah, you never see the kids and the two women in a real camera shot. It sure made a lot of people angry though, from the replies.

I think Foster is one of the gunners now as well.

It's taking on a life of its own...

That's a good piece. Sure hope the Bills can extend him. Seems he likes it here.

Hmmm...The Washington Examiner needs to hire people with better math skills, or maybe it's civics? The guy used 2015Q4 for Obama's last year. I'm pretty sure Obama was president all of 2016.... Using the correct number of 80 for 2016Q4, Trump still boosts the index by 78%. More fun with numbers (and time periods), the index increased 700% under Obama...Yes, it's true...

Signed to the PS according to BN.

F..ing David Byrne stole it from Bowie! ....?

IT would be great to see an analysis of the short yardage plays to find out what the issues are. I know some pointed out Morse getting pushed back. If he's an issue in short yardage, then maybe the Bills should experiment with a short yardage package -- Feliciano at C and Ford at RG? Just a thought. Saw a couple of those goal line run plays on Cover1 just now, and it didn't look like Morse was the issue. Never mind.

I guess we'll get an answer to that question about talent versus culture....

I don't know many people who were calling for a recession 3 years ago. Since the 1970s, recessions have mainly been caused by the Fed raising short rates (the source of the inverted yield curve and its relation to recessions). I predicted a recession to hit in 2019-20 because I thought Trump's fiscal stimulus would cause the Fed to raise rates faster than planned. However, his trade war did more damage than Fed rate increases, causing the Fed to reverse policy. As I see it, we're currently in a tug-of-war between the recession in manufacturing vs all of the service jobs being created from an aging population and consumer spending from employment growth. If Trump can win a real deal with China--not some token stuff to give him a bone to brag about, then the expansion will continue to muddle along at the 2% pace; otherwise, the manufacturing recession is gaining traction....which will spill over onto household consumption and drag the economy lower and possible recession.

You went from stating "none of the data that I've seen supports signs of troubles in any segment of the credit markets." To "There's always a sign of trouble somewhere." Where we agree is the lack of any systemic risk. However, There are some strains starting to show at the very bottom of the market, which is why their spread is rising relative to other risk classes (as one of the articles I posted noted). High-yield default rates are rising and projected to rise further, and downgrades are rising relative to upgrades, according to Moody's as well....

That's the problem. They are Dr Jekyll (good) and Mr Hyde (bad), though mostly the latter. However, they still have that potential to do what they did to the Ravens....