Go to fairtax.org

We don’t need the “same exact amount of spending cuts”. We need enough spending cuts to balance the incoming money – i.e., balance the budget. Most people have to learn how to do that if they expect to not go to jail for borrowing and spending with no intention of repayment. Yet it seems our politicians haven’t learned that lesson.

On the other hand, most are rich so they already have more money coming in than they want to spend. So why should they worry about spending everything they want for the government? They don’t have to pay for it.

There is not a causal relationship between tax cuts and debt. Consumer spending by the almost 50% that essentially doesn’t pay taxes is not going to fix the economy. All it is going to do is transfer debt from government to individuals, because most of those folks don’t save or invest. They mimic government. Liberals should be ashamed of themselves for leading people to those habits, which hold them back for a lifetime.

THE KEY QUESTION: If the top 5% of wage earners hold 60% of the country’s net worth and earn almost 75% of the income, how are liberals going to get them to SPEND or INVEST in jobs by significantly increasing their taxes at this point?

Answer: Taxing won’t do it, so Obama would have to try through legislation or executive order to take the money from accounts for “national security” purposes.

Obama bin Laden has kept the tax cuts, for now, and has increased spending to all time high levels, so what’s your point? The responsibility rest at the feet of Obama bin Laden and not BUSH! OK then BBJ, when they raise taxes you go ahead and pay them all! FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

It’s called Keynesian economics. When the private sector falters, the government must come in and “spend our way out” until the private sector gets back on its feet. You may not like that. I may not like that. But even Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize recipient and classical conservative economist, wrote in the 1980′s, “WE ARE ALL KEYNESIANS NOW.”

The problem is not whether government should involve itself into the economy. Our economic history teaches us that it should. The problem is WHEN does it get in, HOW MUCH, and WHEN does it get out?

When you have the culprits who got us into this mess in the first place obstructing, deceiving, and restricting the government’s ability to effectively intervene, (and, in effect, holding the economic recovery of the entire nation hostage unless they get back into power) there is the rub. Recovery is going to be unnecessarily delayed.

“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” I’ll be voting on November, and holding the real culprits for this mess accountable.

It is called Keynesian economics. And that view has proved to be bad by every country that has tried it. We don’t need to get into it.

Exactly how can a government get us out of a depression by spending money we don’t have? First, we have to pay back the money. Why should I want to pay off a debt that I didn’t agree to and which I didn’t make? Second, they spend money on things that does not generate jobs or money. Right now they want to work on the “infrastructure”. I assume that means roads, bridges, etc. But the only thing that does is allow some contractor who paid a politician a lot of money to have a government job instead of a private one. And, since the government takes the money from the private sector to pay for their “make-work”, the private sector does not provide the work originally intended.

Sorry, but I don’t care what your economic teacher taught you. It was wrong. Take government buying. Years ago I worked for a company that made aluminum. They bought their ore from several oversea sources. The government (ours) felt sorry for the other countries and bought a lot of ore at increased prices to get money into their hands. That simply limited the amount of ore we could buy and increased the cost artificially. In fact, the country our government was paying now has NO mining there. All aluminum companies pulled out. Did it help anyone? Not hardly! Just a few politicians.

Setting aside the cynicism of your opinion expressed here, (you are certainly entitled to your view, I just don’t happen to agree with it) Keynesian economics works. Supply-side economics does not. The Great Depression killed the notion of a pure market system. We are a mixed market system where government does, and must, play a role. If the government, under both President Bush and President Obama, did not get involved, we would be in a full blown depression with at least eight million more people unemployed, an unemployment number in excess of 25%, and extreme deflation.

What is your alternative?

Is Milton Friedman a Keynesian?

http://www.auburn.edu/~garriro/fm2friedman.htm

Quote from Milton Friedman at the age of 73:

“I believe that Keynes’s theory is the right kind of theory in its simplicity, its concentration of a few key magnitudes, its potential fruitfulness. I have been led to reject it not on these grounds, but because I believe that it has been contracted by experience”

Do you have a source citation?

AH, how was Friedman’s mental state when he made that remark? Beyond that, I’d like to know how many planets DL had to vist before he found one where Keynesian economics worked.
Any adult who claims that Keynesian economics works is daffy enough to claim that Germany and Japan won WWII, and that scientists have found ways to grow money on trees (it’s just not as efficient as the Fed’s 24/7 printing presses). DUH!

David L-

Actually you’ll find that same quote of Friedman’s in the Notes section source you gave above.

Friedman felt the U.S. and many other major nations mismanage their economies by manipulating taxes, federal spending and money supply — techniques developed by Keynes. Friedman summed it up this way: “Keynesian economics doesn’t work, But nothing is harder for men than to face facts that threaten to undermine strongly held beliefs.”

One of the later things Friedman did was help Hong Kong’s economy become the huge success it is now — unlike the American government, they were willing to try a different approach.

Perhaps Summers, Geithner, Obama, et al, could learn something here.

So people who are so wealthy that they only spend 5% of their income to live on, only get taxed on that 5%. While the people who have so little that they spend 100% of their income to live on, get taxed on that 100%? Sorry that does not sound fair to me.

I would prefer a flat tax, ALL income is counted as income, interest, rental income, dividend payments, capital gains, payroll, stock options, welfare or SS – everything! No deduction for anything, the first 25000 of everyone’s income is tax free.

Now that I would consider a “fair tax”

BBJ,
Don’t forget, the lower income buys a thousand dollar clunker while the upper income buys a mazeratti. the lower income buys a 16 foot aluminum fishing boat while the upper buys a multi million dollar yacht! the lower buys a fixer upper house while the upper buys a 24 room mansion!! I’ll make it easy for you. Sales tax of 1% 5oo.oo clunker pays 5.00 the 200,000 mazeratti pays 2000!!! Same with the 1000.00 aluminum fishing boat 10.00 two, million yacht 20,000. 50,000 fixer upper 500 dollars, 14,000,000 mansion 140,000 dollars!

by the way, I do favor a flat tax with no deductions, but far lower than the present rate!!

And April 15 would be another day on the calender.

45cal,
I did it the same way and I agree 100%!!!

45,
hey don’t knock old houses!! I live in a house that is 93 years old and has been completely renovated and up dated. i had it inspected before I bought and it passed with flying colors! 5 bedrooms and two full baths! plenty big enough for me and mine. the new ones don’t have any individuality! Even the ones that look different, still somehow look the same!!!

Warrior you should pull your head out of the ground and try reading what I say. My point is simple, the republicans drove us so far into debt that spending cuts ALONE can never pay it back.

Unfortunately the republicans showed the democrats how easy it is to steal 6 trillion dollars from the national treasury – now it looks like the democrats want thier cut!

Stop with the BS. Tax cuts don’t create deficits, spending does. Ya know every single regressive tax since “Bush Tax Cuts” took affect have gone up. My property taxes have doubled since that time. Over 40% of my income is currently taxed. You say ok well just let them take another 5% on top of that, no big deal. The problem is the spending never stops. Are you able to vote yourself a raise every year or shakedown contributors? You’re the one who clearly doesn’t understand the problem.

BBJ:

The Dimocrats have been overspending for at least fifty years. They just made sure the tax burden was high enough for them to do it. At the same time they prevented the Reps from doing the same thing. When the Reps finally get into power they overspend to make up for it. Now that the Dims are back in power they do the same thing. They weren’t “taught” it. They already did it.

Actually, what I would like to see is a reduction of ALL spending to maintenance levels. In other words, NO NEW SPENDING ON ANYTHING! And further, you cut out all the non-essentials.

The Dims discovered a woman executive who was over-spending her government credit card limit by $8 mil a few years ago. They determined that $5 mil went to various charities. They couldn’t determine where the other $3 mil went. But since it went to charities, they wrote it off and let her keep doing it. “After all, $8 mil is only a drop in our spending. Not enough to worry about.”

We can go back and forth on who’s fault it is. But the fact is that when Reagan cut taxes the national debt was TRIPLED. When GWB cut taxes the national debt was DOUBLED AGAIN. You CAN NOT cut taxes and still spend the same amount of money.

“Actually, what I would like to see is a reduction of ALL spending to maintenance levels. In other words, NO NEW SPENDING ON ANYTHING! And further, you cut out all the non-essentials.”

Agree, I also like the Libertarian POV that the USA should not be the world police force – we can not afford it anymore. I also think the war on drugs should be ended, and NO illegal alien should get ANY aid.

BBJ:

One of the first things Reagon did was appoint a board to determine how to pay off the debt. They found out. (The group is still around since they changed to a public group and publish the “Pig Book” every year. I believe it is called the Americans Against Waste.)

It seems that any FHA loan taken out has an insurance rider. If the person doesn’t pay for the loan, the FHA forecloses – and the insurance pays the remaining cost of the loan. So the FHA gets the house AND the cost of the house.

The FHA then “invested” the money in bonds from other countries. They found that while our debt was in the billions, the value of those foreign bonds were in the trillions.

So Reagon didn’t worry about what they spent. Instead they cashed many of the bonds. But Congress didn’t want to pay off the debt with the money. They spent it.

Now I doubt if you went to Mexico and offered their own bonds to cover some costs we owe them that they would accept. The same for all other countries. They want to cash money. So – ON PAPER – we didn’t owe anything. However now, the debt is far higher than what the FHA was holding. And most of that is due to Dimocrat spending, not GOP spending, even counting what Bush spent.

BBJ,
Of course the defricit tripled then doubled!! The spending quadrupled and then tripled again!!! Think things aren’t getting worse? My daughter works at a store on the register and the other day she got an almost uncirculated $5.00 silver certificate! That was a 1935 and no self respecting collector would have let it out of his hands if it wasn’t needed!

Bad – can you give just ONE SINGLE FACT to support your claims? Please, just a couple?

Yes! What you said!

I agree. And I read this morning that England’s government is now considering requiring ALL income be sent to the government FIRST. They will take what they consider their fair share and then send the rest to the workers.

I’m a little leary of what they consider their fair share.

BigBadJohn… Allowing tax cuts to expire is not going to bury America. Spending, spending, spending will bury America.

Robin, you get it. You rate a gold star for having an open mind, and you know from experience what will work. And then there’s BBJ and DS, who rarely ever get it right. They both rate cigarette butts.
They do not have open minds. They think being ‘popular’ with their programmers is better than being able to think on their own. So much for the “joys” of being dependent wards of a corrupt, incompetent government.

SC – you are the one back-asswards. History shows that tax cuts INCREASE the national debt – period! I challenge you to show just ONE TIME when a tax cut actually reduced the national debt!

Do we need to cut spending – absolutely, but that alone is not enough for one simple reason – the amount of debt that the USA has already accrued and the democratic spending is only making it worse.
The last number that I heard is we owe 12 trillion in national debt and another 9 trillion in SS obligations(this may be low).
There is no way we can payback 21 trillion dollars on cuts alone.

It seems that BBJ has forgotten when Reagan and Bush the son cut takes, the economy did so much better then how their predicessors left it. Like I said before, raise taxes and the people have less money. Less money, the less they spend on the things they need. The less they spend, the less money generated by businesses. Businesses have less money, they close plants, stores, or gut their workforce. More people out of work, the more the government spends to support them. The more the government supprts them, they also cut programs. No money for these programs, they raise taxes again. Then it starts the cycle all over again till there is no one with money and the government is broke. They predict that our debt, thanks to the libs and Obama bin Laden, will reach $20 trillion. Someone figured on another post that each person will have to pay between $40000 – $50000 a piece to pay it off. Sorry, but I don’t have it. If you do, go ahead and write a check and give it to the IRS. I’m sure they’ll be happy that you did. What an utter and complete moron! FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

samurai,
hopefully they can pay my part as well!!! I got no benefit from those debts, why should I have to pay it back???

“Allowing tax cuts to expire is not going to bury America. Spending, spending, spending will bury America.”

Robin, I agree, allowing tax cuts to expire is the right thing to do, cutting spending is also the right thing to do……
Even though allowing those tax cuts to expire will cost me personally big time – it is still the right thing to do.

Somehow I suspect that the tax cuts ‘costing you big time’ will hurt you far less than they do most of the rest of us.

45 – “Somehow I suspect that the tax cuts ‘costing you big time’ will hurt you far less than they do most of the rest of us.”

I am in the top 2% income, bouncing against the bottom 1% – just where do you suppose “the rest of us” fit in? I probably paid more in taxes last year then you made.

BBJ:

I really doubt that. You wouldn’t be on this forumn at this time if you did. You’d be too busy working at whatever job you claim to have.

Hi Hflashman.

Robin, what I’ve suspected for a long time is quite clear. BBJ and his fellow space cadets need a long vacation and a lifetime supply of Midol and Prozac.
When people consistently go out of their way to get things wrong, it’s obvious that they’ll never understand it or get it right. I am so grateful for not living around swarms of touchy-feely non-thinkers who double as cave-dwelling moonbats.

s c:

That lifetime supply of medication needs to be all in a single pill. They take it – and their lifetime is over.

Just as I suspected you need to quit drinking that kool-aid. Rhetoric is not fact.

“When people consistently go out of their way to get things wrong, it’s obvious that they’ll never understand it or get it right.”

Still waiting for you to prove me wrong. Republican tax cuts are what have driven the national debt up to 11 trillion dollars. Please show ONE TIME where tax cuts decreased the national debt.

The only way out of this mess is to cut spending AND raise taxes, if you believe otherwise you are completely clueless.

It seems BBJ has forgotten that Obama bin Laden, as well as his cronies, are the one’s who got us into this mess and not the last administration. Obama bin Laden is the POTUS and this is his responsibility. Who asked for proof about the Bush tax cuts? I challenge you to show me proof of how Obama bin Laden has done anything good for America and not some youtube video. Can you do that? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

“It seems BBJ has forgotten that Obama bin Laden, as well as his cronies, are the one’s who got us into this mess and not the last administration.”

Wow talking about drinking way too much kool-aid. From 2000-2008 the national debt doubled, in 2008 the deficit was 1.5 trillion, the housing market crashed and we entered the the worst recession in history. The lousy economy is why Obama was elected in the first place!

BBJ, let me tell you some things that I feel you really need to know about Obama bin Laden.

There’s mourning in America. Today, 15 million men and women won’t have the opportunity to go to work. Businesses shuttered. Our government is now taking over the choices we once made in life. There’s mourning in America. Under the leadership of Obama bin Laden, our country is fading, and weaker, and worse off. His policies were a grand experiment, policies that failed. This November let’s choose a smaller, more caring government…one that remembers us. When Reagan took office in 1981, America was depressed. Inflation and interest rates were sky high, the economy was lagging, and America seemed to be wearing a “kick me” sign on its back. But under Reagan’s leadership-and with the kind of pro freedom and pro growth policies he enacted with bipartisan support-America turned the corner and came back strong. The better, prouder, stronger ad succeeded in the 1984 campaign, and became one of the greatest political ads of all time, because it so brilliantly captured the zeitgeist of the age. Take heart America, with the right kind of leadership, and the right kind of policies, America can come back. Ronald Reagan proved that!

If it could be done in the 1980′s, it can be done now. Remember to vote them out in November. Keep up the good fight, fellow patriots. These things I said about Reagan are the total opposite of what Obama bin Laden has been doing for the last two years. Obama bin Laden has brought patriotism and the American Dream to an all time low, but we can rekindle that light! FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!

You can’t prove my stats wrong, BBJ, so just go home to mommy!

Samurai;Get over your Obama bin Laden dog and pony show.Your rather dumbing down with that spiel. You still didn’t answer His question .

Sorry edduh, but I only read rants and he didn’t ask a question. If he did, it was hidden under his pile of lib BS.

Robin:

You are correct. But the Dims simply see the solution as requiring us to give them more money … and more money … and more. They never seem to realize that we may run out … or they don’t care.

Reminds me of a politician some time back. He wants “only” a simply tax increase of 5%. He couldn’t understand why voters would object. He said that people in places like India pay up to 95% of their income in taxes. Why should the people here object to another 5%? He seemed to not realize that the people here aren’t interested in paying 95% of their income as taxes.

and the republican solution is to keep trying to borrow money?

BBJ:
The GOP and the Dimocrats are the same when it comes to spending and big government. That’s why we are trying to change that in Nov. The CONSERVATIVE belief is that, instead of raising the taxes, we should cut the spending. Apparently your idea is to raise taxes, which gives all of us far less money for ourselves.

45 I believe spending needs to be cut, but because of the republican national debt, that just will not be enough.

The only solution that has been offered since Nixon took us off of the gold standard is to print our way out of debt. GWB cranked up the printing presses and it has not stopped.

Here is what it has done to the dollar:
http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/US/M

Do you honestly think spending can be cut enough to balance the budget without gutting national security and Social Security?

I think we can make enough cuts to get us out of trouble – but you won’t like them. And that is without touching the military or SS.

You cut welfare. If the people are able to work, they are off of it. No young ones allowed to get on. Cut out the Education Department. The states are supposed to be handling that anyway. Cut out Homeland Security. That is the Army’s job. Cut out HUD. That is the state’s job – if it needs to be done at all. In fact of th 100+ agencies the feds now have, you could cut it down to about five or so and still have everything done.

The real problem is that most people in the government know that these cuts could be done. And they don’t want them done. So … like cities and California … they cut the necessary things like the military (police and fire locally) to force the people to vote to cover what they want to cover in addition to the military.

BBJ,
Which party was it that passed a “pay as you go” bill then chose to ignore it??? sure wasn’t Bush!!! Nobummer and party passed it then when they couldn’t live up to it they chose to IGNORE IT!!!!

BigBad – Although the cuts were large and drove revenue down sharply, they are not the main cause of the sizable deficit that exists today. In 2007, well after the tax cuts took effect, the budget deficit stood at 1.2 percent of GDP. By 2009, it had increased to 9.9 percent of the economy. The Bush tax cuts didn’t change between 2007 and 2009, so clearly something else is to blame.

The main culprit was the recession — and the responses it inspired. As the economy shrank, tax revenue plummeted. The cost of the bank bailouts and stimulus packages further added to the deficit. In fact, an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities indicates that the Bush tax cuts account for only about 25 percent of the deficit this year.

Add to that Clinton policies such as NAFTA, Free Trade with China, etc. plus the Fair Housing Act and you have the current recession.

http://www.edlotterman.com/RWE/Articles/20100314.htm

From the Washington Post:

Although the cuts were large and drove revenue down sharply, they are not the main cause of the sizable deficit that exists today. In 2007, well after the tax cuts took effect, the budget deficit stood at 1.2 percent of GDP. By 2009, it had increased to 9.9 percent of the economy. The Bush tax cuts didn’t change between 2007 and 2009, so clearly something else is to blame.

The main culprit was the recession — and the responses it inspired. As the economy shrank, tax revenue plummeted. The cost of the bank bailouts and stimulus packages further added to the deficit. In fact, an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities indicates that the Bush tax cuts account for only about 25 percent of the deficit this year.

It would be nice to pay only on consumables – IF the rate was reasonable.

I saw an economic report that said an 11% tax on goods would pay for all the government needs. However, the government wants up to 25%. And I’m afraid that would cost more than what I’m paying right now.

Support HR 25,”Change I belive in”

Common sense would tell anyone you do not cut taxes during a time of war. You do not reduce your revenues at a time when you are spending more.

Think about it. No wonder we are in such a state.

carole,
Nor when you want to give about 25 million illegals amnesty???

Rich people already pay more taxes than all the 25% lower/middle income people combined. Think California – how many “rich” have moved out of the state since it’s incessant tax increases?

You might also like to study up on the Fair Tax, i.e. VAT tax. It’s not as good as you assume it to be. Study Europe and how it actually works.