Americans back tax increases in debt fix: Reuters poll

[TexasTiger 13,559]

We can balance the budget by CUTTING SPENDING!!!!!

Demonstrate what that will look like with actual numbers and cuts. Are you ready to decimate the military?

[AFTiger 282]

Does anyody really believe that congress will cut spending? Look what happened to the 2 billion that Florida rejected for high speed rail.

[Aufan59 101]

Does anyody really believe that congress will cut spending? Look what happened to the 2 billion that Florida rejected for high speed rail.

They don't cut spending because most people don't want spending cuts. Haven't you seen the attacks to medicare cuts? Republicans want seniors to die. Democrats want to institute death panels.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Fix it by figuring out where the tax code doesn't make sense and is giving away revenue it shouldn't? Perhaps for a while raise rates slightly on upper incomes? Raise the retirement age for Social Security benefits and raise the $106,800 cap on SSI tax eligibility and perhaps introduce a means testing requirement? Restructure Medicare? Stop being the world's policeman?

I know I keep saying the same thing, but my point is to drill into everyone's heads that Democrats and Republicans are both going to have to slaughter some sacred cows or it's simply not going to get done. We'll just kick the can down the road for another generation who will find the situation even worse and perhaps even inescapable.

Great post. I agree with most of it, but I am not sure that raising tax rates on upper incomes will have the desired effect. Cutting entitlements also needs to be done. Could you give more info on the means testing requirement?

Well, any tax increases need to be carefully done and not just trying to soak the rich and create a drag on the economy. But as for means testing, basically I'm thinking that SS needs to be converted to something that phases out based on income/wealth. It's probably something even more important for Medicare though. Basically over a certain income/wealth level it begins to phase out. No reason for Bill Gates to be drawing SS or Medicare. Reserve it for those who truly need it.

[AURaptor 1,137]

... let's go with your assertions for a minute-- increased taxes, decreased spending growth, budget surplus. So we agree.

No, let's NOT go with any of that. There was more to it than mere tax increases. Clinton benefited from a phonied up ( though not his fault ) dot com bubble, which artificially moved the economy along at a faster rate than otherwise should have. THAT's an example of Clinton's 'genius' economic plan....

[TexasTiger 13,559]

... let's go with your assertions for a minute-- increased taxes, decreased spending growth, budget surplus. So we agree.

No, let's NOT go with any of that. There was more to it than mere tax increases. Clinton benefited from a phonied up ( though not his fault ) dot com bubble, which artificially moved the economy along at a faster rate than otherwise should have. THAT's an example of Clinton's 'genius' economic plan....

Earlier you boasted of economic expansion under Bush-- virtually all the family "wealth" generated under Bush was a housing bubble and is now all gone. There was huge growth in technology under Clinton-- part real, part dot.com bubble. The fact remains, that even with the tax increases guys like you said would wreck the economy, the deficit shrunk each year and he left with a surplus. Any sane person knows that the only way we ever balance out budget is by increasing revenues and reigning in medical costs and defense. You don't. I get it.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

I'll say this too...I'm not advocating raising taxes a lot. I understand that you have to find an equilibrium. Perhaps the rates during the Clinton years is about right, maybe not. There's probably not some magical perfect number. But there is a rate structure that can raise more revenue and not kill economic growth. There are loopholes and inequities that could bring things more into balance where people making millions are paying a rate that makes sense instead of being able to get away with paying nothing via accounting tricks that are amazingly legal.

[TexasTiger 13,559]

I'll say this too...I'm not advocating raising taxes a lot. I understand that you have to find an equilibrium. Perhaps the rates during the Clinton years is about right, maybe not. There's probably not some magical perfect number. But there is a rate structure that can raise more revenue and not kill economic growth. There are loopholes and inequities that could bring things more into balance where people making millions are paying a rate that makes sense instead of being able to get away with paying nothing via accounting tricks that are amazingly legal.

It doesn't take that much-- Clinton rates didn't slow economic growth and the rich still got richer. We have the lowest tax burden since 1958.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20060440-503544.html

[AURaptor 1,137]

It doesn't take that much-- Clinton rates didn't slow economic growth and the rich still got richer. We have the lowest tax burden since 1958.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20060440-503544.html

Why does it bother you that the rich EVER get richer ? Seriously, do you think the purpose of taxes is to KEEP people from making money ? To " level the playing field ", and some how help the poor be less poor ? Is that what you think? Because it sure sounds like it. The purpose of taxes is to fund the govt. Period. I'm so sick of this mindless rhetoric from the Left " the rich get richer ". So ? Unless they're doing it by illegal means ( Enron, Madoff ), and continue to pay FAR more than their fair share, then you really have no room to bitch about anything.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Earlier you boasted of economic expansion under Bush-- virtually all the family "wealth" generated under Bush was a housing bubble and is now all gone. There was huge growth in technology under Clinton-- part real, part dot.com bubble. The fact remains, that even with the tax increases guys like you said would wreck the economy, the deficit shrunk each year and he left with a surplus. Any sane person knows that the only way we ever balance out budget is by increasing revenues and reigning in medical costs and defense. You don't. I get it.

Clinton did have the benefit of a 'post cold war' windfall, $ now not being spent on Defense, which in part could be used elsewhere, and also could be NOT spent, as it were, to help by down the deficit. That was a benefit of timing, and had nothing to do w/ Clinton's policies.

I'll say in 10,000 times, if I need to.... the problem we face has NOTHING to do with a lack of revenue being raised. It has to do with SPENDING!

[TexasTiger 13,559]

Earlier you boasted of economic expansion under Bush-- virtually all the family "wealth" generated under Bush was a housing bubble and is now all gone. There was huge growth in technology under Clinton-- part real, part dot.com bubble. The fact remains, that even with the tax increases guys like you said would wreck the economy, the deficit shrunk each year and he left with a surplus. Any sane person knows that the only way we ever balance out budget is by increasing revenues and reigning in medical costs and defense. You don't. I get it.

Clinton did have the benefit of a 'post cold war' windfall, $ now not being spent on Defense, which in part could be used elsewhere, and also could be NOT spent, as it were, to help by down the deficit. That was a benefit of timing, and had nothing to do w/ Clinton's policies.

I'll say in 10,000 times, if I need to.... the problem we face has NOTHING to do with a lack of revenue being raised. It has to do with SPENDING!

And no sane person agrees with you. Demonstrate what exactly you cut to balance the budget. Be specific, use the real numbers and make them add up. Then devise a plan to sell that to the American people.

And the choice to get into two very protracted wars was a choice made by Bush. Iraq was unnecessary, and we could have struck at the Taliban/Bin Laden without engaging in the hopeless task of "nation building" in Afghanistan.

The fact remains that the Republicans always say the same thing and have been proven repeatedly wrong. For the last 30 years they have said that by cutting taxes we will grow ourselves out of debt. They have only increased the debt when they do that. Reagan did, Bush did. They have also said that raising taxes will kill the economy. One President had the guts to do it and had the longest economic expansion in history. You are not arguing with me, you are arguing with demonstrable, historic facts.

[Aufan59 101]

I'll say in 10,000 times, if I need to.... the problem we face has NOTHING to do with a lack of revenue being raised. It has to do with SPENDING!

The PROBLEM is too much spending. The solution has to be increased tax rates and reduced spending. You can only cut medicare and defense so much, you need to increase revenues to make up for the rest...

This is like saying that after a car wreck, the problem was bad driving. This is true. But your stance is that good driving will fix the already happened car wreck. No, you need to take your car to the shop and fix it with things other than good driving.

[AURaptor 1,137]

And no sane person agrees with you.

Said the crazy person.

The Shrinking Military Complex; After the Cold War, the Pentagon Is Just Another Customer

By LESLIE WAYNE

Published: February 27, 1998

As the United States maintains an armed buildup in the Persian Gulf against Iraq, the nation's military contractors are completing a multiyear, multibillion-dollar reorganization that has left them less tied to the Pentagon's needs and more beholden to shareholder pressures and civilian market forces.

A decade-long slide in the nation's military procurement budget -- it is effectively 69 percent lower today than in 1985 -- set off a wave of mergers among military contractors so broad that there are now only three prime military contractors left: the Boeing Company, the Raytheon Company and the Lockheed Martin Corporation.

But more importantly, all three expect military contracts to become an increasingly smaller part of their business. And even at Lockheed, which has led the consolidation, military sales will represent a minority of its business in five years.

In fact, what was seen as a military-industrial complex of hundreds of contractors ready to churn out military hardware at the Pentagon's behest does not exist at anywhere near the same scale it once did. It has been replaced with an industrial base of three major companies, along with many small niche suppliers, where the distinctions between a military contractor and a civilian corporation are increasingly blurred. The Pentagon is becoming just another customer to do business with....

The military procurement budget, which pays for new weapons, fell from a peak of $97 billion in 1985 to $44 billion today

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/27/business/shrinking-military-complex-after-cold-war-pentagon-just-another-customer.html

The GOP has been RIGHT all these years, but the Dems continue to spend and spend and spend. Tax cuts don't cause the reduction in revenue, they increase it. The Dems then go out and spend MORE of our money, there by increasing the deficit and the debt, not making it smaller.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Bammers take pride in how many MNCs they have won. DEMS take pride in how much of our money they can spend to spread the wealth.

[TexasTiger 13,559]

The GOP has been RIGHT all these years, but the Dems continue to spend and spend and spend. Tax cuts don't cause the reduction in revenue, they increase it. The Dems then go out and spend MORE of our money, there by increasing the deficit and the debt, not making it smaller.

George W. Bush had a Republican congress that did his bidding. Glad they got that spending under control.

[Aufan59 101]

The GOP has been RIGHT all these years, but the Dems continue to spend and spend and spend. Tax cuts don't cause the reduction in revenue, they increase it. The Dems then go out and spend MORE of our money, there by increasing the deficit and the debt, not making it smaller.

It is obvious you understand the problem. The problem was caused by spending.

However to solve the problem, you have to do more than cut spending. The math just isn't there on only cutting spending.

The cause of a problem is not always the solution to a problem.

Overeating causes you to gain weight. However you will need to exercise and cut your calories to lose weight.

Bad driving can cause a car wreck. However you will need to repair your car and drive more carefully to fix the problem.

Not brushing your teeth can cause cavities. You will need to get your cavities filled and start brushing your teeth to fix the problem.

In these three cases, the cause of the problem is clear. However, the solution to them isn't just to undo the behavior that caused the problem. You must repair the problem as well as fix the behavior.

Raising taxes will help repair the problem, while decreasing spending is a fix in behavior.

Simple cutting spending mathematically will not get us there, unless we have HUGE spending cuts that will leave our military in shambles and our seniors without health care.

[AURaptor 1,137]

The GOP has been RIGHT all these years, but the Dems continue to spend and spend and spend. Tax cuts don't cause the reduction in revenue, they increase it. The Dems then go out and spend MORE of our money, there by increasing the deficit and the debt, not making it smaller.

George W. Bush had a Republican congress that did his bidding. Glad they got that spending under control.

They didn't. But by not doing what they were suppose to do, what most Americans who voted for them TO do, they left the door open for the Dems. And in '06 and '08, we saw the result.

Since then, the Dems have made things go from fair but manageable, to bad, to off the rails - OMG crazy.

Time to change it back.

[TexasTiger 13,559]

The GOP has been RIGHT all these years, but the Dems continue to spend and spend and spend. Tax cuts don't cause the reduction in revenue, they increase it. The Dems then go out and spend MORE of our money, there by increasing the deficit and the debt, not making it smaller.

George W. Bush had a Republican congress that did his bidding. Glad they got that spending under control.

They didn't. But by not doing what they were suppose to do, what most Americans who voted for them TO do, they left the door open for the Dems. And in '06 and '08, we saw the result.

Since then, the Dems have made things go from fair but manageable, to bad, to off the rails - OMG crazy.

Time to change it back.

Sorry, but the Republicans took things of the rails during their 6 years of total government control. Obama took the helm after the economy blew up.

[AFTiger 282]

Actually, we started coming off the rails when Clinton and his merry band of Democrats ramped up the Community Reinvestment Act and caused the housing bubble. Obama has done everything he can to not only keep the economy derailed but also he is removing the tracks.

[AURaptor 1,137]

Sorry, but the Republicans took things of the rails during their 6 years of total government control. Obama took the helm after the economy blew up.

Revise history much ? Odd how the economy started to tank , not long after the Dems took control of the House, after the '06 elections.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Actually, we started coming off the rails when Clinton and his merry band of Democrats ramped up the Community Reinvestment Act and caused the housing bubble. Obama has done everything he can to not only keep the economy derailed but also he is removing the tracks.

You really don't understand what happened, do you

[AFTiger 282]

Actually, we started coming off the rails when Clinton and his merry band of Democrats ramped up the Community Reinvestment Act and caused the housing bubble. Obama has done everything he can to not only keep the economy derailed but also he is removing the tracks.

You really don't understand what happened, do you

I do, but clearly you continually prove that you are cluless.