How about this: Cut spending and Raise taxes 2-5% on the top 1%

[Polk]

Neither will your moronic proposal.

Because they will base their budget on the projected extra revenue the tax increases would allegedly bring. This figure is always grossly bloated, and when the actuals come in it won't be near as much of a largesse as they said, and WHAM! Even BIGGER deficits! Then will be the howls never ending, to raise taxes yet again.

When the PROBLEM actually is, they are not required by law to have a balanced budget. They used to be, it was laws called Gramm-Rudman and line-item veto during the 90s, that gave Bill Clinton his "surplus," but alas, they were thrown out by the courts.

Until we get such instituted again, we will never get out of the debt hole.

You don't actually care about debt and deficits, you just want the feel good thing of higher taxes on the evil rich.

There was no law requiring a balanced budget

Gramm-Rudmann. Had automatic cuts to keep the deficit down. It was the law of the land to have a balanced budget.

This is not accurate.

Gramm–Rudman–Hollings's fixed deficit targets were not effect at holding down the deficit (also, interesting you left out the name of the bill's Democratic sponsor). To the (minor) extent budget rules played a significant part in the surpluses of the late 90s, they come from PAYGO, which was introduced as part of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990.

 

[Article 15]

How 'bout we cut spending back to 1990 levels and leave the tax structure as is?

 

[Polk]

Increasing taxes on the wealthiest won't help at all, it will merely lead to higher deficits when the projected revenue falls short. Without spending controls mandated by law, we are always going to have ballooning deficits.

Utter nonsense. While you can't balance the budget entirely with tax hikes, there is no logical reason to believe increasing the rate in top earners will result in reduced revenue.

There is however ample Evidence in the past. Dating back to JFK, Reagan and Bush, that lowering taxes, Especially on the middle and upper rates. Can in fact Increase Revenue. It is logic then to conclude that the Reverse could in certain Cases be true.

It really is basic Economics. Increased Taxes have a slowing effect on the Economy. A slower Economy means less is being taxed, Less people are working, etc. Now if the slowing off sets the increased Tax Revenue from the Increased %, Could in fact result in a net loss of Revenue.

Except that Reagan and Bush's tax cuts both reduced revenue.

 

[The Gadfly]

Why do you guys keep saying "we"? I'm talking about raising the taxes on the top 1% so dont take it personal. You arent affected.

One, we have NO guarantee you won't extend it to us, too; you party's track record says you will.

Two, those people are paying their share, while your party's favored constituencies pay NOTHING; that's right, zip, zilch, nada, not one red cent!

I tell you what I want, since you DIDN'T ask: I want every American to pay something. I want every American to write 5 checks a year to the United States Treasury, just like I have to. To hell with this "hide it through withholding" garbage, where you can fool people into thinking government is "giving" them something, when it refunds their own money to them. I want them to write those checks, so they know exactly what government is taking from them. I don't care, if it's only fifty bucks a year; I want all to pay, and all to know what exactly they are paying. You want "fairness"? Well, that's as totally fair as it gets, for everyone from the working poor to the mega rich, and if you liberal democrats want to HAVE equality, instead of just prattle about it, that's the way to do it! Now put up, or shut up!

Everyone pays taxes. And I want a world where I make the rules as well, unfortunatly I know that wont happen and try to look for answers within reality. That world that you describe will never, has never and will never be proposed or accomplished by any lawmaker, so it'a kinda easy to be pro...that

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

 

[Polk]

One, we have NO guarantee you won't extend it to us, too; you party's track record says you will.

Two, those people are paying their share, while your party's favored constituencies pay NOTHING; that's right, zip, zilch, nada, not one red cent!

I tell you what I want, since you DIDN'T ask: I want every American to pay something. I want every American to write 5 checks a year to the United States Treasury, just like I have to. To hell with this "hide it through withholding" garbage, where you can fool people into thinking government is "giving" them something, when it refunds their own money to them. I want them to write those checks, so they know exactly what government is taking from them. I don't care, if it's only fifty bucks a year; I want all to pay, and all to know what exactly they are paying. You want "fairness"? Well, that's as totally fair as it gets, for everyone from the working poor to the mega rich, and if you liberal democrats want to HAVE equality, instead of just prattle about it, that's the way to do it! Now put up, or shut up!

Everyone pays taxes. And I want a world where I make the rules as well, unfortunatly I know that wont happen and try to look for answers within reality. That world that you describe will never, has never and will never be proposed or accomplished by any lawmaker, so it'a kinda easy to be pro...that

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

Also misleading. They "don't pay income tax", as long as you don't count the payroll tax as an income tax.

 

[ClosedCaption]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

Even Obama has had to admit, by Capitulation that raising taxes right now, on any Bracket. Is a bad Idea.

Yeah, because hes such a radical liberal.

2% is a bad idea? dam, anything or do we have to slash benes that we, WE all on here have paid into. Let's face it, more than a few republicans will need these benes in the future and it's not because they are lazy but hey, shit happens. To be against any tax increase...ANY...but be so willing to slash children education, Social Security and everything else is on the table is like cutting your own throat for a belief.

 

[Political Junky]

How 'bout we cut spending back to 1990 levels and leave the tax structure as is?

You mean to astronomical Reagan era spending?

Apparently.

 

[The Gadfly]

Everyone pays taxes. And I want a world where I make the rules as well, unfortunatly I know that wont happen and try to look for answers within reality. That world that you describe will never, has never and will never be proposed or accomplished by any lawmaker, so it'a kinda easy to be pro...that

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

Also misleading. They "don't pay income tax", as long as you don't count the payroll tax as an income tax.

Let me help you out; FICA is NOT "federal income tax". That's supposed to be an insurance and pension system, not funding for running the government (though politicians raid the "trust fund " regularly. All I'm asking is that EVERY American pay at least $50 in federal income tax annually, and that EVERY American pay federal income tax quarterly, so they can see what they're actually paying, without gimmicks to hide it from them. I'll bet that would give a lot of people a wake up call on the matter of taxation; as it is, a lot of people are paying more than they think they are, while they think their politicians are sticking someone else with the bill. I'm just asking for a little "truth in taxation" here.

 

[Stephanie]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

Even Obama has had to admit, by Capitulation that raising taxes right now, on any Bracket. Is a bad Idea.

Yeah, because hes such a radical liberal.

2% is a bad idea? dam, anything or do we have to slash benes that we, WE all on here have paid into. Let's face it, more than a few republicans will need these benes in the future and it's not because they are lazy but hey, shit happens. To be against any tax increase...ANY...but be so willing to slash children education, Social Security and everything else is on the table is like cutting your own throat for a belief.

well well
where have we heard all this before.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

Also misleading. They "don't pay income tax", as long as you don't count the payroll tax as an income tax.

Let me help you out; FICA is NOT "federal income tax". That's supposed to be an insurance and pension system, not funding for running the government (though politicians raid the "trust fund " regularly. All I'm asking is that EVERY American pay at least $50 in federal income tax annually, and that EVERY American pay federal income tax quarterly, so they can see what they're actually paying, without gimmicks to hide it from them. I'll bet that would give a lot of people a wake up call on the matter of taxation; as it is, a lot of people are paying more than they think they are, while they think their politicians are sticking someone else with the bill. I'm just asking for a little "truth in taxation" here.

"FICA" is not the only withholding tax taken out of paychecks. Federal Income Tax is taken out as well.

 

[NYcarbineer]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

Currently our spending is too high and our taxes are too low. Yes, a balanced approach of cutting spending and raising taxes makes the most sense.

 

[DiamondDave]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

And here comes the support for selective equal treatment by government again....

 

[NYcarbineer]

One, we have NO guarantee you won't extend it to us, too; you party's track record says you will.

Two, those people are paying their share, while your party's favored constituencies pay NOTHING; that's right, zip, zilch, nada, not one red cent!

I tell you what I want, since you DIDN'T ask: I want every American to pay something. I want every American to write 5 checks a year to the United States Treasury, just like I have to. To hell with this "hide it through withholding" garbage, where you can fool people into thinking government is "giving" them something, when it refunds their own money to them. I want them to write those checks, so they know exactly what government is taking from them. I don't care, if it's only fifty bucks a year; I want all to pay, and all to know what exactly they are paying. You want "fairness"? Well, that's as totally fair as it gets, for everyone from the working poor to the mega rich, and if you liberal democrats want to HAVE equality, instead of just prattle about it, that's the way to do it! Now put up, or shut up!

Everyone pays taxes. And I want a world where I make the rules as well, unfortunatly I know that wont happen and try to look for answers within reality. That world that you describe will never, has never and will never be proposed or accomplished by any lawmaker, so it'a kinda easy to be pro...that

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

Republican tax policy, with some occasional assistance from the Democrats, is the main reason half of Americans pay no income tax.

It's funny how many conservatives liked that policy at the time, and now lament its consequences.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Increasing taxes on the wealthiest won't help at all, it will merely lead to higher deficits when the projected revenue falls short. Without spending controls mandated by law, we are always going to have ballooning deficits.

Utter nonsense. While you can't balance the budget entirely with tax hikes, there is no logical reason to believe increasing the rate in top earners will result in reduced revenue.

There is however ample Evidence in the past. Dating back to JFK, Reagan and Bush, that lowering taxes, Especially on the middle and upper rates. Can in fact Increase Revenue. It is logic then to conclude that the Reverse could in certain Cases be true.

It really is basic Economics. Increased Taxes have a slowing effect on the Economy. A slower Economy means less is being taxed, Less people are working, etc. Now if the slowing off sets the increased Tax Revenue from the Increased %, Could in fact result in a net loss of Revenue.

Even Left leaning Economist, and People in this Administration, Under stand and Admit that increased Taxes run a real danger of Slowing the Recovery(Growth) of the economy. JFK, Reagan, and Bush all understood one thing. The Way to increase Revenues is not to increase taxes. It is to grow the Economy and thereby the Tax Base you are taxing. Bushes Cuts did indeed Increase revenue to the Fed. The only problem was Bush Increased Spending at the same time and built up Debt. However that does not change the fact that his So called Tax cuts for the rich, lead to a growth in Revenue. That is fact. And the same principle was proven true By Reagan and JFK before them.

It is important to point out and make very clear that economic growth comes from the private sector. Not by increasing the numbers of federal or state employees.
Government work produces nothing. It only consumes. Yes, government workers spend their earnings but their employment only covers the consumer side of the economy.
Private enterprise satisfies both the consumer economy AND productivity economy.

Historically, there is overwhelming evidence showing each instance where federal tax rates were decreased along with the requisite reductions in discretionary government spending, revenue to the federal government increased while decreasing government deficit.

 

[thereisnospoon]

There was no law requiring a balanced budget

Gramm-Rudmann. Had automatic cuts to keep the deficit down. It was the law of the land to have a balanced budget.

This is not accurate.

Gramm–Rudman–Hollings's fixed deficit targets were not effect at holding down the deficit (also, interesting you left out the name of the bill's Democratic sponsor). To the (minor) extent budget rules played a significant part in the surpluses of the late 90s, they come from PAYGO, which was introduced as part of the Budget Enforcement Act of 1990.

The Act to which is being referred has always been called the "Gramm-Rudman Act. This indicates no slight to any member of a particular political party.
Grow a thicker skin.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Everyone pays taxes. And I want a world where I make the rules as well, unfortunatly I know that wont happen and try to look for answers within reality. That world that you describe will never, has never and will never be proposed or accomplished by any lawmaker, so it'a kinda easy to be pro...that

Excuse me, but your fearless leader who can do no wrong, Obama, bragged about removing 50 % of Americans from the income tax system. That's right, half the people pay NO federal income taxes! Then you want others to make up all of it? I repeat, let everyone pay SOMETHING, however little. That may never happen, but it ought to, and it would, if the words "politician" and "unprincipled liar" weren't synonymous. Of course none of them want the people to know what they pay for government; the truth might keep them from being re-elected. I tell you this though; I'd actually like to see one that would put a bill to that effect on the floor, and announce it in public, just to watch the rest of them squirm.

Also misleading. They "don't pay income tax", as long as you don't count the payroll tax as an income tax.

Yer kidding, yes?
These low wage earners payroll deduction, if any, is about 7%. By mid June of the following year, these people have all filed their 1040EZ and have gotten their checks. The result is ZERO federal income tax liability. Get it?

 

[boedicca]

Oh wow, another novel idea. RAISE TAXES.

Great idea. As of April 1st, the U.S. will have the highest corporate tax rates in the world:

TaxProf Blog: Tax Foundation: On April 1, U.S. Is #1 (World's Highest Corporate Tax Rate)


Let's raise them further so we can make double digit unemployment a structural feature of the economy.

 

[Spoonman]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

Currently our spending is too high and our taxes are too low. Yes, a balanced approach of cutting spending and raising taxes makes the most sense.

Taxes are too low?

 

[thereisnospoon]

That way we dont slash programs to the bone that are needed to keep society going and the rich wont be hurt by an extreme tax increase. Then we can climb out of the deficit twice as fast.

Can we do two things at once? Or is any tax increase socialism?

Even Obama has had to admit, by Capitulation that raising taxes right now, on any Bracket. Is a bad Idea.

Yeah, because hes such a radical liberal.

2% is a bad idea? dam, anything or do we have to slash benes that we, WE all on here have paid into. Let's face it, more than a few republicans will need these benes in the future and it's not because they are lazy but hey, shit happens. To be against any tax increase...ANY...but be so willing to slash children education, Social Security and everything else is on the table is like cutting your own throat for a belief.

Once again a flaming lib falls right into their own trap.
"Slash benes we all paid into". Umm Continuing down this current path SS will be insolvent in 25 years.
"slash children education"....Hey sunshine....first, it is not the job of the federal government to be funding STATE run public schools. Since the feds insist on sticking their noses into state business, there should be a gradual draw down in federal school subsidies. And the eventual closing of any federal public school agency.
Now, pay very close attention....The budgets for the sacred cows you mentioned above are not being CUT...Was is being reduced is the annual increase in spending. These and other federal mandates are simply getting budget increase reductions. The Left has always referred to these as "cuts"....That's a lie.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Also misleading. They "don't pay income tax", as long as you don't count the payroll tax as an income tax.

Let me help you out; FICA is NOT "federal income tax". That's supposed to be an insurance and pension system, not funding for running the government (though politicians raid the "trust fund " regularly. All I'm asking is that EVERY American pay at least $50 in federal income tax annually, and that EVERY American pay federal income tax quarterly, so they can see what they're actually paying, without gimmicks to hide it from them. I'll bet that would give a lot of people a wake up call on the matter of taxation; as it is, a lot of people are paying more than they think they are, while they think their politicians are sticking someone else with the bill. I'm just asking for a little "truth in taxation" here.

"FICA" is not the only withholding tax taken out of paychecks. Federal Income Tax is taken out as well.

Ahh...finally somebody on the Left tells the truth. FICA (SS) is indeed a "tax"...
Thank you so much!
Look, I appreciate the dancing, bobbing and weaving by the Left on this. However when the bottom 50% are referred to as paying no tax, what is being said is their federal income tax liability is ZERO.......
Everyone pay taxes. There are sales taxes form both the state and federal governments. there are taxes on cell phones, land line phones, internet access, federal excise taxes, etc. Once again the issue is federal income tax liability.