If the Fed Budget was managed like household's what programs would be cut?

[g5000]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

 

[LoneLaugher]

Secrets of the Federal Budget Revealed
Trying to simplify the US Budget process, 2019 revenue is about $3.4T, plus the borrowing of about $985b to cover the $4.4T 2018 Budget. That is at least $900b too high. So looking at the Budget items from the article:

Mandatory spending $2.74T
Social Security $1,050b
Medicare $625b
Medicaid $412b
Welfare $462b
Interest on the Debt $363b

Discretionary $1.3T
Defense $893b

Busting 5 Myths About Government Discretionary Spending
Department Budget Emergency Total Discretionary
Dept of Defense $597.1 $88.9 $686.0
HHS $69.5 $0.5 $70.0
Education $59.9 $59.9
VA $83.1 $83.1
Homeland Security $46.0 $6.7 $52.7
Energy Dept $29.2 $29.2
NNSA $15.1 $15.1
HUD $29.2 $29.2
State Dept $28.3 $12.0 $40.3
NASA $19. $19.9
All Other Agencies$129.8 $3.3 $133.1
TOTAL $1,303b

If you stare at the numbers for a few minutes it becomes apparent that to cut spending by more than $900b it needs to come from Entitlements.
SS can't be cut, those benefits were promised. However, the retirement age can be raised and a few tweaks can be made to keep it solvent.
Medicare can't be cut, those benefits were promised, however some savings can be realized to keep it solvent.
Medicaid can be cut, those benefits were not earned.
Welfare can be cut, those benefits were not earned.

If the deficit is covered 1/2 by cuts and 1/2 by revenue
Revenue needs to increase by $500b. (all tax rates need to increase 10%)
Defense needs to be cut by at least 10%, say $100b to $793b
Cuts of $400b need to come out of welfare ($250b) + ($150b) medicaid, with some savings from SS & Medicare if possible.

Who supports getting back to a Balanced Budget? It is not that difficult

You ever notice none of these lists of government spending ever include the $1.4 trillion spent on tax expenditures?

Hmmmm...

Dude.....getting these freaks to acknowledge that tax expenditures costs that can be cut is not going to happen.

You know that.

Just make me Dictator of America for 24 hours.

I'd be finished before lunch, and can spend the rest of the day waterboarding Sean Hannity on pay-per-view.

Not so fast. You’d raise the retirement age on hardworking peeps. That’s a no-no.

 

[eagle1462010]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

 

[Cellblock2429]

Policy Report: Running Out of Other People’s Money

That gap is the “unfunded liability” or “implicit debt” for those programs.

Implicit debt, of course, represents the “softest” form of debt, in that there is no legal requirement to pay all the promised benefits. But “soft” does not mean debt that can be completely dismissed. Those benefit payments are called for under current law, and it would take congressional action to change them. Unless and until Congress does so, those obligations exist. That is why, for private companies, future promises to pay benefits are generally categorized as debt according to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and other accounting authorities. If the government was required to report its debt in the same way public companies do, those promises would show up as debt.

Social Security’s future unfunded obligations now run to more than $24.9 trillion. Medicare’s unfunded liabilities are more difficult to nail down, in part because of the uncertainty brought about by the new health care reform law. In 2009, Medicare’s trustees estimated that the program’s unfunded liabilities were $88.9 trillion. Since then, health care inflation has been running at a slower rate. Economists debate the reason for this decline and whether it will continue, but it has resulted in a reduction of Medicare’s unfunded liabilities to just (!) $47.6 trillion. Thus, the real combined federal debt (debt held by public + intragovernmental debt + implicit debt) actually totals at least $90.5 trillion. That’s real money—even in Washington— roughly $282,000 for every man, woman, and child in America. Students graduating from college today worry about their college debt…. That’s nothing compared with what they owe as a share of the country’s debt.

Moreover, these projections assume that interest rates on government debt remain somewhere near current levels, which is about 2 percent. The CBO points out that, even at this low rate, interest on the debt is becoming an ever larger portion of federal spending. This year, the federal government will pay $229 billion in interest charges. By 2024, with just a modest expected increase in interest rates, that will rise to more than $808 billion. Not long afterward, we will be paying a trillion dollars every year just for interest on the debt. By 2035, in fact, interest on the debt will be tied with Medicare as the second-largest line item in the federal budget, trailing only Social Security.

And interest rates may not stay this low. It is estimated that every 1 percent increase in interest rates adds as much as $1 trillion in additional interest payments over the next decade. Over the past two decades the average rate of interest on government debt has been roughly 5.7 percent. Therefore, if interest rates were to return to anything close to traditional levels, it would add trillions to our future obligations.

SS is supposed to be able to pay 79% of promised benefits even if they let it go insolvent.
Social Security must reduce benefits in 2034 if reforms aren't made - CNNPolitics

Medicare's unfunded liabilities can be addressed by increasing the 20% hole to a higher percentage.

I still want the government to Balance the Budget so we aren't borrowing to cover the interest on the Debt. Its like using a credit card for everything until it maxes out, then you declare bankruptcy. Except the US can't do that.

S.S. was designed that the population would have to increase dramatically over time to pay for itself.......When it began there was plenty of people to pay in for what goes out. It was also based on how long people live. The Intergovernmental debt..........aka the money in that was robbed.........replaced by IOU's.....will eventually go to 0......and then debt will explode at even a greater rate.........

Pension debt is massive.......S.S., Medicaid, and Medicare future debt is massive..........No dang way to pay what's coming..........

For decades I would show how we could cut spending.......and increase revenue......why waste my time anymore when the the Gov't will never do it anyway. The debt will continue to explode upwards until we implode.............and have a global reset.........Every year it gets worse.......and they will do nothing to change it.............

Thus why I put up the kiss my ass video in this thread........

/----/ FDR wanted to allow privatization of a portion of SS payments but Congress blocked it. We'd be in a better position today if they had allowed it. And yes I can prove it.
How Three Texas Counties Created Personal Social Security Accounts and Prospered

 

[eagle1462010]

Report: Beyond Tax Expenditures

 

[g5000]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

Eliminating tax expenditures coupled to lowering tax rates is a bedrock conservative principle. Unfortunately, the pseudocons have never even been on the conservative reservation.

I've proven the truth about tax expenditures a zillion times, but what the heck...

Here is Deven Nunes, one of Trump's butt boys, explaining that every credit, deduction, and exemption is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone: No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says

"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."


Read that a hundred times if that is how much it takes for you to comprehend it.

Nunes sits on the House Ways and Means Committee. That's the committee responsible for taxation.

Nunes clearly states that every deduction, exemption, and credit is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone. That's why I call them government gifts, because they are. They are theft from someone else's pocket.

 

[kyzr]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

If you're suggesting eliminating all deductions, all that means is that everyone will pay more tax. The OP suggests that spending cuts are needed too. Otherwise everyone's tax rate will increase a lot more than 10%.

Closing Tax loopholes is a good idea, if you can get the pols to buck all the lobbyists.

 

[g5000]

Reagan's famous tax reform of 1986 involved the elimination of tax expenditures. That's how he was able to lower tax rates.

Did you know you used to be able to deduct the interest payments on a car loan from your taxes?

Not after Reagan's tax reform. That went away.

But ever since Reagan's tax reform, Congress critters have been paid millions and millions of dollars to put tax expenditures back in the tax code, and then some.

They have been adding government gifts to the tax code at the rate of one a day for almost two decades now.

And guess which party is the top dog at doing this? Anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

That's right. The Republicans.

Those sneaky fucks are bigger spenders than the Democrats. They are just a lot better at hiding it from the rubes who don't know a tax expenditure from a turtle.

 

[g5000]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

If you're suggesting eliminating all deductions, all that means is that everyone will pay more tax.

Nope.

See the tax reform of 1986.

The elimination of tax expenditures is tied to tax rate reductions.

Read that quote from Deven Nunes again. And again. And again. Until you get it.

 

[kyzr]

Closing Loopholes is not going to solve the Budget Deficit problem. I don't know how much can be gained by closing them all, and I do support closing them all, but total savings needs to cover the $900b deficit.

 

[eagle1462010]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

Eliminating tax expenditures coupled to lowering tax rates is a bedrock conservative principle. Unfortunately, the pseudocons have never even been on the conservative reservation.

I've proven the truth about tax expenditures a zillion times, but what the heck...

Here is Deven Nunes, one of Trump's butt boys, explaining that every credit, deduction, and exemption is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone: No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says

"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."


Read that a hundred times if that is how much it takes for you to comprehend it.

Nunes sits on the House Ways and Means Committee. That's the committee responsible for taxation.

Nunes clearly states that every deduction, exemption, and credit is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone. That's why I call them government gifts, because they are. They are theft from someone else's pocket.

Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing..............

Your article shows getting rid of the loop holes but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore.........Not to mention the Subsidies I already listed.......

Why not just get rid of the subsidies all together..........

In regards to loopholes..........your issue is a tax increase.........big business would then pass the cost on to the consumers.....They aren't gonna eat it.........

And nothing really changes............

We have a spending problem .............and Mandatory spending is the Lion's share of all of it.

Your proposal is a tax increase.............

 

[g5000]

We currently have an insane system where entities earning identical incomes are paying radically different tax amounts. One entity is paying less AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER.

That part in caps is the part your propagandists don't tell you. They deliberately keep that from you. You are being robbed, and are being programmed to DEFEND that robbery!


Without tax expenditures, everyone earning identical incomes would be paying identical taxes. And the tax rates for everyone would be MUCH lower.

And no more borrowing.

The reason our government borrows so much is because we would not tolerate the full tax rates it would take to fully pay for $1.5 triiion of annual tax expenditures.

 

[g5000]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

Eliminating tax expenditures coupled to lowering tax rates is a bedrock conservative principle. Unfortunately, the pseudocons have never even been on the conservative reservation.

I've proven the truth about tax expenditures a zillion times, but what the heck...

Here is Deven Nunes, one of Trump's butt boys, explaining that every credit, deduction, and exemption is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone: No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says

"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."


Read that a hundred times if that is how much it takes for you to comprehend it.

Nunes sits on the House Ways and Means Committee. That's the committee responsible for taxation.

Nunes clearly states that every deduction, exemption, and credit is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone. That's why I call them government gifts, because they are. They are theft from someone else's pocket.

Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing..............

Your article shows getting rid of the loop holes but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore.........Not to mention the Subsidies I already listed.......

Why not just get rid of the subsidies all together..........

In regards to loopholes..........your issue is a tax increase.........big business would then pass the cost on to the consumers.....They aren't gonna eat it.........

And nothing really changes............

We have a spending problem .............and Mandatory spending is the Lion's share of all of it.

Your proposal is a tax increase.............

Nope. No matter how many times you claim eliminating tax expenditures and lowering tax rate for EVERYONE is a tax increase, it will not become true.

You are practically saying the same thing I am when you say "Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing".

But you see, you are being hoaxed by the flat taxers. They have you believing our problem is the type of tax system we have. They have you believing the problem is the progressive tax system.

It isn't.

It is tax expenditures which are the problem.

You will never hear a single flat tax politician claim their flat tax will have "no loopholes". That's because politicians count on gigantic sums of money from special interest who pay them to create $1.5 trillion worth of gifts in the tax code for them.

You said, "but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore". That's absolutely right! That's why I said several posts ago that my plan would serendipitously create campaign finance reform.

If a politician is not allowed to put a gift in the tax code, then there is no incentive to pay him to do so. Voila!

 

[eagle1462010]

We currently have an insane system where entities earning identical incomes are paying radically different tax amounts. One entity is paying less AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER.

That part in caps is the part your propagandists don't tell you. They deliberately keep that from you. You are being robbed, and are being programmed to DEFEND that robbery!


Without tax expenditures, everyone earning identical incomes would be paying identical taxes. And the tax rates for everyone would be MUCH lower.

And no more borrowing.

The reason our government borrows so much is because we would not tolerate the full tax rates it would take to fully pay for $1.5 triiion of annual tax expenditures.

aka increased taxes.........

Put a Flat Tax in at a fixed rate.........no deductions and file your taxes on a post card every year...........

x amount and done.........end all subsidies and grants.........end the gov't being in the housing market.......sell off all assets........and stop giving money to other countries we have to borrow money for to pay for it.

 

[g5000]

I prefer the Fair Tax. It is a consumption tax, which is superior to taxes on production.

But if the Fair Tax is allowed to exempt some items from the tax, then we are right back where we started. We would have to raise the Fair Tax rate to compensate for all the exemptions.

The flat tax is a tax on production. And if the flat income tax is allowed to exempt some income from taxation, then we are right back where we started. We would have to raise the flat tax rate to compensate for all the credits, exemptions, and deductions.

Just. Like. We. Do. Now.

 

[g5000]

We currently have an insane system where entities earning identical incomes are paying radically different tax amounts. One entity is paying less AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER.

That part in caps is the part your propagandists don't tell you. They deliberately keep that from you. You are being robbed, and are being programmed to DEFEND that robbery!


Without tax expenditures, everyone earning identical incomes would be paying identical taxes. And the tax rates for everyone would be MUCH lower.

And no more borrowing.

The reason our government borrows so much is because we would not tolerate the full tax rates it would take to fully pay for $1.5 triiion of annual tax expenditures.

aka increased taxes.........

Put a Flat Tax in at a fixed rate.........no deductions and file your taxes on a post card every year...........

x amount and done.........end all subsidies and grants.........end the gov't being in the housing market.......sell off all assets........and stop giving money to other countries we have to borrow money for to pay for it.

See, you keep saying "no deductions".

How the ever loving fuck is that different from what I'm saying?

Geezus!

You're almost there. Stop and think.

 

[eagle1462010]

After Tax Reform, Tax Expenditures Remain Costly

aka basically it is a tax increase proposal.........some of which I already posted........Tax Credits..............

Would basically get rid of all tax deductions...............

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

Eliminating tax expenditures coupled to lowering tax rates is a bedrock conservative principle. Unfortunately, the pseudocons have never even been on the conservative reservation.

I've proven the truth about tax expenditures a zillion times, but what the heck...

Here is Deven Nunes, one of Trump's butt boys, explaining that every credit, deduction, and exemption is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone: No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says

"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."


Read that a hundred times if that is how much it takes for you to comprehend it.

Nunes sits on the House Ways and Means Committee. That's the committee responsible for taxation.

Nunes clearly states that every deduction, exemption, and credit is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone. That's why I call them government gifts, because they are. They are theft from someone else's pocket.

Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing..............

Your article shows getting rid of the loop holes but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore.........Not to mention the Subsidies I already listed.......

Why not just get rid of the subsidies all together..........

In regards to loopholes..........your issue is a tax increase.........big business would then pass the cost on to the consumers.....They aren't gonna eat it.........

And nothing really changes............

We have a spending problem .............and Mandatory spending is the Lion's share of all of it.

Your proposal is a tax increase.............

Nope. No matter how many times you claim eliminating tax expenditures and lowering tax rate for EVERYONE is a tax increase, it will not become true.

You are practically saying the same thing I am when you say "Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing".

But you see, you are being hoaxed by the flat taxers. They have you believing our problem is the type of tax system we have. They have you believing the problem is the progressive tax system.

It isn't.

It is tax expenditures which are the problem.

You will never hear a single flat tax politician claim their flat tax will have "no loopholes". That's because politicians count on gigantic sums of money from special interest who pay them to create $1.5 trillion worth of gifts in the tax code for them.

You said, "but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore". That's absolutely right! That's why I said several posts ago that my plan would serendipitously create campaign finance reform.

If a politician is not allowed to put a gift in the tax code, then there is no incentive to pay him to do so. Voila!

I have no problem with getting rid of loop holes that business take advantage of..............and ending all subsidies that pick winners and losers...........

But it is in fact a tax increase..............

You say it's the same as a flat tax...........well a flat tax can be stepped as well.........and end all loop holes within it.............but they would never do it.........you know that..

Doesn't address unfunded Liabilities............and doesn't address them pushing the cost on to the public........they aren't going to eat it.

 

[eagle1462010]

We currently have an insane system where entities earning identical incomes are paying radically different tax amounts. One entity is paying less AT THE EXPENSE OF THE OTHER.

That part in caps is the part your propagandists don't tell you. They deliberately keep that from you. You are being robbed, and are being programmed to DEFEND that robbery!


Without tax expenditures, everyone earning identical incomes would be paying identical taxes. And the tax rates for everyone would be MUCH lower.

And no more borrowing.

The reason our government borrows so much is because we would not tolerate the full tax rates it would take to fully pay for $1.5 triiion of annual tax expenditures.

aka increased taxes.........

Put a Flat Tax in at a fixed rate.........no deductions and file your taxes on a post card every year...........

x amount and done.........end all subsidies and grants.........end the gov't being in the housing market.......sell off all assets........and stop giving money to other countries we have to borrow money for to pay for it.

See, you keep saying "no deductions".

How the ever loving fuck is that different from what I'm saying?

Geezus!

You're almost there. Stop and think.

I've stated that on the Flat Tax method.........and understand that when you take out loop holes that is actually a Tax increase.........

Don't dance around that...........and I understand that business lobbies bought off politicians to get their loop holes.....nothing new there.

 

[g5000]

We have $1.4 trillion of exemptions, credits, and deductions each year.

As a result, we have to raise the tax rates on everyone. Except we don't raise them high enough to balance the budget. If we raised them high enough to balance the budget, everyone would riot.

So we raise them as much as we dare, and borrow the rest.

And that's how we got to $21 trillion of debt.

 

[g5000]

Tax expenditures are paid for by raising tax rates on EVERYONE, and by borrowing trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars.

So eliminating tax expenditures would result in....anyone?....anyone?...anyone?

Reduced tax rates and no more borrowing!

Link it........sounds like tax increases to me...........which are a double edged sword........they kill jobs at the same time

Eliminating tax expenditures coupled to lowering tax rates is a bedrock conservative principle. Unfortunately, the pseudocons have never even been on the conservative reservation.

I've proven the truth about tax expenditures a zillion times, but what the heck...

Here is Deven Nunes, one of Trump's butt boys, explaining that every credit, deduction, and exemption is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone: No tax reform without border adjustment tax, Rep. Nunes says

"If people wanted to drop the corporate rate from 35 to say 33, 32, maybe 30, we could probably do it. But if you go back to several years that we looked at doing just that, the goal was to get to 25 percent, and by the time every lobbyist, every special interest group in town, representing every major corporation in this country, the tax rate was automatically all the way back above 30 by the time you put everybody's special loophole in."


Read that a hundred times if that is how much it takes for you to comprehend it.

Nunes sits on the House Ways and Means Committee. That's the committee responsible for taxation.

Nunes clearly states that every deduction, exemption, and credit is paid for by raising tax rates on everyone. That's why I call them government gifts, because they are. They are theft from someone else's pocket.

Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing..............

Your article shows getting rid of the loop holes but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore.........Not to mention the Subsidies I already listed.......

Why not just get rid of the subsidies all together..........

In regards to loopholes..........your issue is a tax increase.........big business would then pass the cost on to the consumers.....They aren't gonna eat it.........

And nothing really changes............

We have a spending problem .............and Mandatory spending is the Lion's share of all of it.

Your proposal is a tax increase.............

Nope. No matter how many times you claim eliminating tax expenditures and lowering tax rate for EVERYONE is a tax increase, it will not become true.

You are practically saying the same thing I am when you say "Flat Tax with no loop holes does the same thing".

But you see, you are being hoaxed by the flat taxers. They have you believing our problem is the type of tax system we have. They have you believing the problem is the progressive tax system.

It isn't.

It is tax expenditures which are the problem.

You will never hear a single flat tax politician claim their flat tax will have "no loopholes". That's because politicians count on gigantic sums of money from special interest who pay them to create $1.5 trillion worth of gifts in the tax code for them.

You said, "but lobbyists would stop paying their favorite Politicians the money anymore". That's absolutely right! That's why I said several posts ago that my plan would serendipitously create campaign finance reform.

If a politician is not allowed to put a gift in the tax code, then there is no incentive to pay him to do so. Voila!

I have no problem with getting rid of loop holes that business take advantage of..............and ending all subsidies that pick winners and losers...........

But it is in fact a tax increase..............

You say it's the same as a flat tax...........well a flat tax can be stepped as well.........and end all loop holes within it.............but they would never do it.........you know that..

Doesn't address unfunded Liabilities............and doesn't address them pushing the cost on to the public........they aren't going to eat it.

It's amusing me that you can see how the flat tax rate would be lower without deductions, but can't see how the current income tax would be lower without deductions.

This is fucking hilarious.

You've been bamboozled by misdirection, and that has been done on purpose.