Mmm, President Trump has not reduced the deficit. The numbers have gone down, which is not that impressive since they are just as likely to go back up. But he will have to actually enact fiscal legislation that directly effects the continued decrease in numbers before his Administration can claim responsibility.
The government projects deficits five years out. It is possible for that projection to move without legislation. If, for example, the result of the EO’s regarding jobs, deregulation, and such result in higher corporate revenues and/or the creation of better paying jobs than we’ve seen, the commensurate decrease in deficit could be mapped to those policies. Possibly.
But I’m surprised to see that most of what is considered ‘liberal or mainstream’ press agrees that ‘yes’, the numbers did go down for a month. The disagreement seems to be that President Trump shouldn’t be so quick to claim credit.
When you do statistics on US budgets, AS A MATTER OF PRACTICE, you attribute the first year of the new presidents tenure to the old president, because we’re still on Obama’s budget until the end of the US fiscal year. There is always some “tweaking” at the edges if the new president gets something passed very early that skews the numbers (for example, although 2009 belongs to Bush, Obama got a 950B stimulus package passed and authorized the second tranche of TARP, so that’s on him, not GWB) but normally you leave that first year on the prior president’s account.
I’m not sure what jobs he’s brought back? God knows I’d love to hear the particulars on those numbers if you have them. In SC we’re losing jobs as fast as we gain them — so we’re, as a whole, staying fairly stagnant with an unemployment rate staying at about 4.4 since October 2016.
It’s too early to have decent data on that. And at 4.4%, SC is pretty much at peak employment. Trump’s success or failure its not going to be measured on raw unemployment numbers, which are already very low; they’ll be measured on if average real wage starts to rise at a rate in excess of the barely-above-zero average of the Obama years.
Hope that helps.