West Ham Online

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 21:27

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 21:09

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 19:09

After today’s embarrassment you are in no position to be throwing around insults at anyone on this site. At least you got a basic maths lesson for free.

Per Trillion dollars in GDP generates approx &165-190 Billion dependant on who’s algorithm you choose to believe. Since 2020 US GDP has grown from $20 Trillion to $30 Trillion. Even with your speculative numbers that would more than pay for Trumps tax cuts and then some.

But do Carry on telling everyone just how much GDP the Us will generate over the next 5 years. We’re all ears.

Per Grok AI.

The amount of tax revenue generated per $1 trillion in GDP depends on the tax-to-GDP ratio (also called the revenue-to-GDP ratio), which varies significantly by country, what level of government is included (federal/national only vs. all levels including state/local), and the specific year (due to economic conditions, policy changes, etc.).

This ratio represents the percentage of GDP collected as tax revenue. Therefore:

- Tax revenue per $1 trillion GDP = (tax-to-GDP ratio as a decimal) × $1 trillion.

### Key Examples (Based on Recent Data)
- United States (most common context for this question in USD terms):
  - Total tax revenue (federal + state + local): Typically around 25–27% of GDP in recent years.
    - OECD data for 2023: 25.2% total tax-to-GDP ratio.
    - Earlier/recent estimates (2021–2024 period): Often cited around 27% (Tax Policy Center) or similar.
    - → This means roughly $250–270 billion in total tax revenue per $1 trillion of GDP.
  - Federal revenue only (what people often mean by "tax revenue" in US discussions): Usually 16–19% of GDP.
    - Recent figures: Around 17% (U.S. Treasury Fiscal Data for FY 2025 estimates).
    - Historical average (last 40+ years): ~17.4% (CBO).
    - In some years like 2022: Closer to 19–20%.
    - → This means roughly $170–190 billion in federal tax revenue per $1 trillion of GDP.

You can go argue with Grok if you like.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 21:09

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 19:09

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:58

Yeah I know, the sky is falling!


Again. LOL

After today’s embarrassment you are in no position to be throwing around insults at anyone on this site. At least you got a basic maths lesson for free.

Per Trillion dollars in GDP generates approx &165-190 Billion dependant on who’s algorithm you choose to believe. Since 2020 US GDP has grown from $20 Trillion to $30 Trillion. Even with your speculative numbers that would more than pay for Trumps tax cuts and then some.

But do Carry on telling everyone just how much GDP the Us will generate over the next 5 years. We’re all ears.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 21:09

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 19:09

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:58

Yeah I know, the sky is falling!


Again. LOL

After today’s embarrassment you are in no position to be throwing around insults at anyone on this site. At least you got a basic maths lesson for free.

Per Trillion dollars in GDP generates approx &165-190 Billion dependant on who’s algorithm you choose to believe. Since 2020 US GDP has grown from $20 Trillion to $30 Trillion. Even with your speculative numbers that would more than pay for Trumps tax cuts and then some.

But do Carry on telling everyone just how much GDP the Us will generate over the next 5 years. We’re all ears.

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 19:09

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:58

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:35

A strong start of growth lower than Biden, higher food & electricity prices and a ballooning national debt.

congrats.

Yeah I know, the sky is falling!


Again. LOL

After today’s embarrassment you are in no position to be throwing around insults at anyone on this site. At least you got a basic maths lesson for free.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:58

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:35

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:31

As I said at the start let’s see what happens. Hopefully you upgraded your crystal ball from last year.

Looks like we are off to a strong start with all of the Trump wins in 2025. I expect 2026 to be a great year for the American taxpayer. You can continue to pray for your long game. LOL

A strong start of growth lower than Biden, higher food & electricity prices and a ballooning national debt.

congrats.

Yeah I know, the sky is falling!


Again. LOL

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:35

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:31

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:21

 Moving the goalposts because you’ve humiliated yourself?

Trump has seen the fastest accumulation of debt since…… the last time he was in office. That debt will balloon when the tax cuts land. $300bn a year additional debt remember.

Boosting GDP at a slower full year rate than Biden? Some achievement that.

As I said at the start let’s see what happens. Hopefully you upgraded your crystal ball from last year.

Looks like we are off to a strong start with all of the Trump wins in 2025. I expect 2026 to be a great year for the American taxpayer. You can continue to pray for your long game. LOL

A strong start of growth lower than Biden, higher food & electricity prices and a ballooning national debt.

congrats.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:31

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:21

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:15

National debt? most of it was already there before Trump took office?  Boosting GDP and cutting Gov’t bloat and spending and reducing Interest rates are ways of reducing it. Weren’t you paying attention?

 Moving the goalposts because you’ve humiliated yourself?

Trump has seen the fastest accumulation of debt since…… the last time he was in office. That debt will balloon when the tax cuts land. $300bn a year additional debt remember.

Boosting GDP at a slower full year rate than Biden? Some achievement that.

As I said at the start let’s see what happens. Hopefully you upgraded your crystal ball from last year.

Looks like we are off to a strong start with all of the Trump wins in 2025. I expect 2026 to be a great year for the American taxpayer. You can continue to pray for your long game. LOL

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:21

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:15

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:32

I’m surprised you’ve got the front to carry on posting on this subject after the way you’ve embarrassed yourself.

We can post the link to the CBO document if you like? We can highlight the bit about national debt impacts.

National debt? most of it was already there before Trump took office?  Boosting GDP and cutting Gov’t bloat and spending and reducing Interest rates are ways of reducing it. Weren’t you paying attention?

 Moving the goalposts because you’ve humiliated yourself?

Trump has seen the fastest accumulation of debt since…… the last time he was in office. That debt will balloon when the tax cuts land. $300bn a year additional debt remember.

Boosting GDP at a slower full year rate than Biden? Some achievement that.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 18:15

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:32

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:26

I’d ignore my last post too if I were you.

I’m surprised you’ve got the front to carry on posting on this subject after the way you’ve embarrassed yourself.

We can post the link to the CBO document if you like? We can highlight the bit about national debt impacts.

National debt? most of it was already there before Trump took office?  Boosting GDP and cutting Gov’t bloat and spending and reducing Interest rates are ways of reducing it. Weren’t you paying attention?

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:32

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:26

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:49

I’m glad you quoted the CBO because they’re the ones telling you how much these tax cuts will add to the national deb and they’ve factored in the cost savings you mentioned. You’ve basically just confirmed what I said about debt growth due to tax cuts.

You can wriggle all you want but even 5% GDP growth (which it isn’t) only covers two thirds of lost tax revenue.

keep digging yourself deeper son.

I’d ignore my last post too if I were you.

I’m surprised you’ve got the front to carry on posting on this subject after the way you’ve embarrassed yourself.

We can post the link to the CBO document if you like? We can highlight the bit about national debt impacts.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 17:26

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:49

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:34

Now that Trump has Biden’s inflation under control and a new Fed chair coming in lowering Biden’s high interest rates fixes the tax cut deficits. See below.

Add to that the cut backs in SNAP benefits Medicaid and Medicare fraud that’s costing the taxpayers Billions per year, exact amounts are not known because there is a multi state investigation under way, but the extent of the fraud is expected to be $19 billion in Minnesota alone. Probably more. Reduction is prescription drugs is a huge saving for Medicare see Trumps “most favored nation” bill estimated to save $200 billion per year on prescription drugs, Coupled with an increase in GDP which typically averages around 2.5% that is now running at a clip of above 5% you’ll find the tax cuts are easily paid for.

Remember we are no longer throwing $100’s of billions into the Ukraine money pot that Biden was, as well as all the other handout Trump is stopping in foreign aid, USAID, WHO etc:

I think the tax cuts are a prime example of America first. After all the money does belong to the worker ffs. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, not even you- you communist.

As of January 2026 (current date: January 25, 2026), here's the latest available picture:

### Actual/Year-to-Date Figures for FY 2026
Fiscal Year 2026 runs from October 1, 2025, to September 30, 2026. Through the first quarter (October–December 2025):
- Net interest outlays totaled approximately $270–276 billion (sources vary slightly; Peterson Foundation reports ~$270 billion, CBO Monthly Budget Review and related reports cite ~$276 billion for a similar period, up significantly from the prior year—e.g., +11–12% or about $30 billion more than Q1 FY 2025).
- Treasury Fiscal Data reports cumulative interest expense (gross, on the national debt) at $355 billion FYTD as of December 31, 2025 (this may include some gross vs. net distinctions, but aligns directionally with high interest costs).
- This pace suggests monthly interest is averaging around $90–92 billion recently (e.g., December 2025 net interest around $92 billion per some Treasury statements).

### Full-Year Projections/Estimates for FY 2026 or Calendar 2026
- Nonpartisan sources like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Peterson Foundation (PGPF) project net interest payments around $1.0 trillion (or slightly above) for calendar year 2026 or FY 2026 under current law baselines. This marks a continuation of the trend where interest crossed the $1 trillion annual threshold recently (e.g., FY 2025 net interest totaled ~$970 billion, already nearing or hitting $1 trillion in some accountings).
- Interest costs are projected to reach 3.2% of GDP in 2026 (per CBO/PGPF), surpassing the previous historical high set in 1991.
- For context:
  - This is up sharply from earlier years (e.g., $345 billion in FY 2020, $880 billion in FY 2024).
  - Over the next decade (e.g., 2026–2035), CBO projects cumulative net interest of $13.8 trillion (with some CRFB analyses noting potential for higher under alternative scenarios involving sustained high rates or policy changes).

I’m glad you quoted the CBO because they’re the ones telling you how much these tax cuts will add to the national deb and they’ve factored in the cost savings you mentioned. You’ve basically just confirmed what I said about debt growth due to tax cuts.

You can wriggle all you want but even 5% GDP growth (which it isn’t) only covers two thirds of lost tax revenue.

keep digging yourself deeper son.

I’d ignore my last post too if I were you.

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:49

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:34

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:11

Really? You actually want to carry on embarrassing yourself on this?

GDP isn’t government income. To recoup the loss in tax revenues GDP would have to grow more than 8%. Simple maths that I reckon my son could master.

You think that is going to happen?

Now that Trump has Biden’s inflation under control and a new Fed chair coming in lowering Biden’s high interest rates fixes the tax cut deficits. See below.

Add to that the cut backs in SNAP benefits Medicaid and Medicare fraud that’s costing the taxpayers Billions per year, exact amounts are not known because there is a multi state investigation under way, but the extent of the fraud is expected to be $19 billion in Minnesota alone. Probably more. Reduction is prescription drugs is a huge saving for Medicare see Trumps “most favored nation” bill estimated to save $200 billion per year on prescription drugs, Coupled with an increase in GDP which typically averages around 2.5% that is now running at a clip of above 5% you’ll find the tax cuts are easily paid for.

Remember we are no longer throwing $100’s of billions into the Ukraine money pot that Biden was, as well as all the other handout Trump is stopping in foreign aid, USAID, WHO etc:

I think the tax cuts are a prime example of America first. After all the money does belong to the worker ffs. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, not even you- you communist.

As of January 2026 (current date: January 25, 2026), here's the latest available picture:

### Actual/Year-to-Date Figures for FY 2026
Fiscal Year 2026 runs from October 1, 2025, to September 30, 2026. Through the first quarter (October–December 2025):
- Net interest outlays totaled approximately $270–276 billion (sources vary slightly; Peterson Foundation reports ~$270 billion, CBO Monthly Budget Review and related reports cite ~$276 billion for a similar period, up significantly from the prior year—e.g., +11–12% or about $30 billion more than Q1 FY 2025).
- Treasury Fiscal Data reports cumulative interest expense (gross, on the national debt) at $355 billion FYTD as of December 31, 2025 (this may include some gross vs. net distinctions, but aligns directionally with high interest costs).
- This pace suggests monthly interest is averaging around $90–92 billion recently (e.g., December 2025 net interest around $92 billion per some Treasury statements).

### Full-Year Projections/Estimates for FY 2026 or Calendar 2026
- Nonpartisan sources like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Peterson Foundation (PGPF) project net interest payments around $1.0 trillion (or slightly above) for calendar year 2026 or FY 2026 under current law baselines. This marks a continuation of the trend where interest crossed the $1 trillion annual threshold recently (e.g., FY 2025 net interest totaled ~$970 billion, already nearing or hitting $1 trillion in some accountings).
- Interest costs are projected to reach 3.2% of GDP in 2026 (per CBO/PGPF), surpassing the previous historical high set in 1991.
- For context:
  - This is up sharply from earlier years (e.g., $345 billion in FY 2020, $880 billion in FY 2024).
  - Over the next decade (e.g., 2026–2035), CBO projects cumulative net interest of $13.8 trillion (with some CRFB analyses noting potential for higher under alternative scenarios involving sustained high rates or policy changes).

I’m glad you quoted the CBO because they’re the ones telling you how much these tax cuts will add to the national deb and they’ve factored in the cost savings you mentioned. You’ve basically just confirmed what I said about debt growth due to tax cuts.

You can wriggle all you want but even 5% GDP growth (which it isn’t) only covers two thirds of lost tax revenue.

keep digging yourself deeper son.

Nurse Ratched" wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:37

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:15 Burnham blocked from standing.
Labour obliterated in May elections & Farage on his way to no.10
Unbelievable o.g by Starmer & his stooges

 

Blocking Burnham from standing because Starmer is frit is egregious and I can't get my head round how Starmer and his team think it's acceptable. 

In the 1980s, I remember a Tory minister (Cecil Parkinson) had to resign because he got his long-time secretary/mistress pregnant and she went public with the news. It was considered a terrible scandal, a stain on his morals and integrity so serious that he couldn't be capable of being a minister in Government. Thatcher dragged her feet a bit, but it was inevitable he would have to go. What will it take for that robotic greige weasel Starmer to resign in shame? Look at the shameless herberts on both sides of the house these days. Apparently Crayons Rayner is on manoeuvres in the background, despite only having resigned/been pushed out in disgrace a matter of mere months ago. 

Also, Starmer's head is far too big for his haircut. Something very sinister about that.

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:34

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:11

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 15:37

To match the revenue loss. That’s the entire loss of the revenue, Not the $300 billion deficit numbnuts.

Really? You actually want to carry on embarrassing yourself on this?

GDP isn’t government income. To recoup the loss in tax revenues GDP would have to grow more than 8%. Simple maths that I reckon my son could master.

You think that is going to happen?

Now that Trump has Biden’s inflation under control and a new Fed chair coming in lowering Biden’s high interest rates fixes the tax cut deficits. See below.

Add to that the cut backs in SNAP benefits Medicaid and Medicare fraud that’s costing the taxpayers Billions per year, exact amounts are not known because there is a multi state investigation under way, but the extent of the fraud is expected to be $19 billion in Minnesota alone. Probably more. Reduction is prescription drugs is a huge saving for Medicare see Trumps “most favored nation” bill estimated to save $200 billion per year on prescription drugs, Coupled with an increase in GDP which typically averages around 2.5% that is now running at a clip of above 5% you’ll find the tax cuts are easily paid for.

Remember we are no longer throwing $100’s of billions into the Ukraine money pot that Biden was, as well as all the other handout Trump is stopping in foreign aid, USAID, WHO etc:

I think the tax cuts are a prime example of America first. After all the money does belong to the worker ffs. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, not even you- you communist.

As of January 2026 (current date: January 25, 2026), here's the latest available picture:

### Actual/Year-to-Date Figures for FY 2026
Fiscal Year 2026 runs from October 1, 2025, to September 30, 2026. Through the first quarter (October–December 2025):
- Net interest outlays totaled approximately $270–276 billion (sources vary slightly; Peterson Foundation reports ~$270 billion, CBO Monthly Budget Review and related reports cite ~$276 billion for a similar period, up significantly from the prior year—e.g., +11–12% or about $30 billion more than Q1 FY 2025).
- Treasury Fiscal Data reports cumulative interest expense (gross, on the national debt) at $355 billion FYTD as of December 31, 2025 (this may include some gross vs. net distinctions, but aligns directionally with high interest costs).
- This pace suggests monthly interest is averaging around $90–92 billion recently (e.g., December 2025 net interest around $92 billion per some Treasury statements).

### Full-Year Projections/Estimates for FY 2026 or Calendar 2026
- Nonpartisan sources like the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Peterson Foundation (PGPF) project net interest payments around $1.0 trillion (or slightly above) for calendar year 2026 or FY 2026 under current law baselines. This marks a continuation of the trend where interest crossed the $1 trillion annual threshold recently (e.g., FY 2025 net interest totaled ~$970 billion, already nearing or hitting $1 trillion in some accountings).
- Interest costs are projected to reach 3.2% of GDP in 2026 (per CBO/PGPF), surpassing the previous historical high set in 1991.
- For context:
  - This is up sharply from earlier years (e.g., $345 billion in FY 2020, $880 billion in FY 2024).
  - Over the next decade (e.g., 2026–2035), CBO projects cumulative net interest of $13.8 trillion (with some CRFB analyses noting potential for higher under alternative scenarios involving sustained high rates or policy changes).

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:15 Burnham blocked from standing.
Labour obliterated in May elections & Farage on his way to no.10
Unbelievable o.g by Starmer & his stooges

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 16:11

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 15:37

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 13:17

No wonder you failed GCSE business studies.

Even if GDP growth accelerated from ~2 % to ~3–4 % for many years, it still wouldn’t generate enough additional revenue to cover the full multi-trillion-dollar cost of the cuts. 
You’d need additional GDP growth of ~7–8 percentage points above baseline every year — sustained over a decade — purely to generate enough extra revenue to match the revenue loss.

To match the revenue loss. That’s the entire loss of the revenue, Not the $300 billion deficit numbnuts.

Really? You actually want to carry on embarrassing yourself on this?

GDP isn’t government income. To recoup the loss in tax revenues GDP would have to grow more than 8%. Simple maths that I reckon my son could master.

You think that is going to happen?

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 15:37

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 13:17

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:50

You daft cսnt $300 billion is 1% of our $30 Trillion GDP.

“need growth that is unprecedented” what a cսnt’

GO away you Div!

No wonder you failed GCSE business studies.

Even if GDP growth accelerated from ~2 % to ~3–4 % for many years, it still wouldn’t generate enough additional revenue to cover the full multi-trillion-dollar cost of the cuts. 
You’d need additional GDP growth of ~7–8 percentage points above baseline every year — sustained over a decade — purely to generate enough extra revenue to match the revenue loss.

To match the revenue loss. That’s the entire loss of the revenue, Not the $300 billion deficit numbnuts.

goose wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 13:17

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:50

goose wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 22:25

Not an exact science but not something you get wrong by $300bn.
Like I said, you’d need growth which is historically unprecedented to cover the loss of tax revenues. To the point where it’s completely unthinkable and unimaginable.

So yes I’d bet my house on something that has less than 1% of happening.

You daft cսnt $300 billion is 1% of our $30 Trillion GDP.

“need growth that is unprecedented” what a cսnt’

GO away you Div!

No wonder you failed GCSE business studies.

Even if GDP growth accelerated from ~2 % to ~3–4 % for many years, it still wouldn’t generate enough additional revenue to cover the full multi-trillion-dollar cost of the cuts. 
You’d need additional GDP growth of ~7–8 percentage points above baseline every year — sustained over a decade — purely to generate enough extra revenue to match the revenue loss.

• The US collects about $5 trillion a year in taxes
  • That’s only ~17–18% of GDP
• Because taxes are ~18% of GDP:
  • 1% extra GDP growth only raises tax revenue by ~0.18% of GDP
  • That’s about $55bn per year on today’s economy
• To cover $450bn a year in lost revenue:
  • You’d need ~8–9% EXTRA GDP growth every single year
  • On top of normal growth
• That means total growth of ~9–10% per year

Nutsin wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:50

goose wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 22:25

Nutsin wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 22:20

It’s not an exact science numbnuts. There are bulls and bears that’s what makes a market, some economists that are bearish some economists that are bullish. Some from either side have their algorithms. You and your propagandists are the Bears. That’s all it is.

It’s no inside secret and certainly not something you’d bet your house on.

Not an exact science but not something you get wrong by $300bn.
Like I said, you’d need growth which is historically unprecedented to cover the loss of tax revenues. To the point where it’s completely unthinkable and unimaginable.

So yes I’d bet my house on something that has less than 1% of happening.

You daft cսnt $300 billion is 1% of our $30 Trillion GDP.

“need growth that is unprecedented” what a cսnt’

GO away you Div!

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:15 Burnham blocked from standing.
Labour obliterated in May elections & Farage on his way to no.10
Unbelievable o.g by Starmer & his stooges

goose wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 22:25

Nutsin wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 22:20

goose wrote: ↑24 Jan 2026, 21:59

 

The tax cuts are $500bn a year and they’ve said it’ll add $300bn to the debt.
There is no real world scenario that pays for those tax cuts.

You can play dumb all you like, but this really is obvious stuff.




 

It’s not an exact science numbnuts. There are bulls and bears that’s what makes a market, some economists that are bearish some economists that are bullish. Some from either side have their algorithms. You and your propagandists are the Bears. That’s all it is.

It’s no inside secret and certainly not something you’d bet your house on.

Not an exact science but not something you get wrong by $300bn.
Like I said, you’d need growth which is historically unprecedented to cover the loss of tax revenues. To the point where it’s completely unthinkable and unimaginable.

So yes I’d bet my house on something that has less than 1% of happening.

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑25 Jan 2026, 12:15 Burnham blocked from standing.
Labour obliterated in May elections & Farage on his way to no.10
Unbelievable o.g by Starmer & his stooges