LogikAndReazon
Gold Member
- Feb 21, 2012
- 5,351
- 668
- 190
- Thread starter
- #61
The country has zero revenue problems, only a massive spending problem.................
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The country has zero revenue problems, only a massive spending problem.................
The country has zero revenue problems, only a massive spending problem.................
Explain how revenue does not factor into the equation
deficit = spending - revenue
Thanks.
You'll never convince someone who loves government spending that it is a problem. it's a lost cause. To them, the government can spend 90% of GDP and they will ask for another 5%. Because government is the answer to all problems.
Raising taxes on the rich was the cornerstone of President Obamas reelection campaign. If were serious about reducing the deficit, Obama told a rally in Columbus, Ohio, on election day, weve got to ask the wealthiest Americans to go back to the tax rates they paid when Bill Clinton was in office.
But just how much deficit reduction would Obamas tax hikes on the rich necessarily accomplish?
Nothing, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Letting tax rates rise to Clinton era levels for those families making over $250,000 a year would only raise $824 billion over ten years. That is not even enough revenue to undo the sequester that Obama promised will not happen during his final debate with Mitt Romney....
How much deficit reduction would Obama
If the asshole was serious about "revenues decreasing the deficit" he let the Bush tax cuts expire on EVERYONE. But no, not this one, he's got to engage in class warfare.
That would be detrimental to the economy at this point.
If the asshole was serious about "revenues decreasing the deficit" he let the Bush tax cuts expire on EVERYONE. But no, not this one, he's got to engage in class warfare.
That would be detrimental to the economy at this point.
bullshit. we have a 16 trillion dollar debt. let the tax cuts expire on everyone. let's get that damn debt under control and cease with the class warfare.
You'll never convince someone who loves government spending that it is a problem. it's a lost cause. To them, the government can spend 90% of GDP and they will ask for another 5%. Because government is the answer to all problems.
Correction
To them, the government can spend 100% of GDP and they will ask for another 5%.
The country has zero revenue problems, only a massive spending problem.................
Explain how revenue does not factor into the equation
deficit = spending - revenue
Thanks.
Deficits happen when spending>revenue
That's the problem. The fucking government rapes to the tune of almost 3 trillion dollars a year there is plenty of revenue the problem is there is too much spending.
That would be detrimental to the economy at this point.
bullshit. we have a 16 trillion dollar debt. let the tax cuts expire on everyone. let's get that damn debt under control and cease with the class warfare.
Its difficult to imagine how taking money out of the hands of the consumers spending it would be a good idea at this point.
Explain how revenue does not factor into the equation
deficit = spending - revenue
Thanks.
Deficits happen when spending>revenue
That's the problem. The fucking government rapes to the tune of almost 3 trillion dollars a year there is plenty of revenue the problem is there is too much spending.[/QU
deficit = spending - revenue
So revenue should not be in the above equation?
A deficit is revenue - spending when spending> revenue.
A surplus is revenue- spending when revenue>spending.
In your equation one can have a positive deficit that is an oxymoron.
So the problem with deficits is the spending because at 3 trillion a year the government has enough revenue
Raising taxes on the rich was the cornerstone of President Obamas reelection campaign. If were serious about reducing the deficit, Obama told a rally in Columbus, Ohio, on election day, weve got to ask the wealthiest Americans to go back to the tax rates they paid when Bill Clinton was in office.
But just how much deficit reduction would Obamas tax hikes on the rich necessarily accomplish?
Deficits happen when spending>revenue
That's the problem. The fucking government rapes to the tune of almost 3 trillion dollars a year there is plenty of revenue the problem is there is too much spending.[/QU
deficit = spending - revenue
So revenue should not be in the above equation?
A deficit is revenue - spending when spending>than revenue.
A surplus is revenue- spending when revenue>spending.
So the problem with deficits is the spending because at 3 trillion a year the government has enough revenue
Define 'enough revenue'.
Raising taxes on the rich was the cornerstone of President Obamas reelection campaign. If were serious about reducing the deficit, Obama told a rally in Columbus, Ohio, on election day, weve got to ask the wealthiest Americans to go back to the tax rates they paid when Bill Clinton was in office.
But just how much deficit reduction would Obamas tax hikes on the rich necessarily accomplish?
Nothing, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
Letting tax rates rise to Clinton era levels for those families making over $250,000 a year would only raise $824 billion over ten years. That is not even enough revenue to undo the sequester that Obama promised will not happen during his final debate with Mitt Romney....
How much deficit reduction would Obama
A deficit is revenue - spending when spending>than revenue.
A surplus is revenue- spending when revenue>spending.
So the problem with deficits is the spending because at 3 trillion a year the government has enough revenue
Define 'enough revenue'.
Enough to do the minimum required of it as defined by the Constitution
Define 'enough revenue'.
Enough to do the minimum required of it as defined by the Constitution
We don't want to do only the minimum.
Enough to do the minimum required of it as defined by the Constitution
We don't want to do only the minimum.
I like the mininum: provide for the general welfare.