Discussion in 'Politics' started by Billy000, Dec 3, 2011.
... are they still supporing the Bush tax cuts?
Because tax cuts have no effect on spending.
Only spending has effects on spending. Seems kind of obvious
No, because there was plan to pay for the Bush tax cuts which contributed to the deficit.
Allowing people to keep the money they earned is NOT spending.
It may not be spending, but it has the same effect as spending.
Are you referring to the Bush tax cuts that 92% of House Democrats and 77% of Senate Democrats voted to extend in 2010?
1) GovTrack: House Vote #604 (Dec 2, 2010)
2) GovTrack: Senate Vote #276 (Dec 15, 2010)
3) H.R. 4853 [111th]: Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (GovTrack.us)
No. It doesn't.
If your boss cuts your salary, has he spent any of your money?
If you think that the Bush tax cuts haven't been a huge contributor to the debt crisis, then you are terribly misinformed.
Or I simply understand that our problem is spending and not revenue.
We brought it $2.15 Trillion dollars last year. Are you honestly suggesting we can't balance the budget and pay down the debt with that much revenue? We can't run the government at the same cost as we did just a few years ago?
I was under the impression that "Tax cuts" and " Gov't Spending" were two different issues entirely.
Separate names with a comma.