Tax cuts do not cost anything. Nor do they need to be "paid for"

[danielpalos]

True. When government says you can have big bennies without paying for them, as Bush did and as Trump is doing, people demand more of those freebies. When you make it clear that freebies aren't free, people want less of them.

There is not enough money in the United States if you taxed 100% of everything everyone owns, you would not even put a dent in the debt. shit for brains
It's far too large to be able to pay back

Where do you get that idea? I've seen US GDP for 2015 estimated at a bit over $18 trillion.

United States GDP | 1960-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

 

[danielpalos]

All that matters is debt, the country has been not living within its means for decades.
And progressives/socialists/deadbeats cannot expect the prosperous and successful to fit the bill. Socialism has totally fucked this country over and up, they the entitled nanny state people think they can expect other people to take care of them - **** that! **** that! **** that!
Lol

While debt might be "all that matters," it is deficits which create and continue that debt. A surplus allows the debt to be reduced. I'm certainly far from an economist, but these seem like fairly simple concepts. Deficit = spending more than is taken in. Surplus = spending less than is taken in. Debt = total amount owed.

There most certainly can be both a surplus during a given year or given period of years while still having debt. The surplus must equal or exceed the amount of debt to get rid of it. This country could run a surplus for the next decade, or century, and not eliminate the debt, if the surplus were not large enough.

Until there is no doubt, there is no surplus… Fact

A) I assume you mean debt rather than doubt.

B) That is a fact only if you define surplus as a total, rather than yearly. I believe it is generally used as a descriptor for yearly budgets, the opposite of a deficit.

If I have $1 and I spent $1000 where does that put me?

Two bilions of dollars Richer.. according to the left..


.

That is the right claiming we can spend that much, instead of relying on social morals for free, through "abstinence and just saying no".

 

[danielpalos]

If the goal is reducing government, tax cuts are a mistake. We should raise taxes, across the board, until the budget balances. Then we can have an honest discussion about how much government we really want.

True. When government says you can have big bennies without paying for them, as Bush did and as Trump is doing, people demand more of those freebies. When you make it clear that freebies aren't free, people want less of them.

But let's keep on voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford in the first place then charge American citizens for it, wether they use them or not, to teach Americans how much it is actually costing them. Yayy!! Free college for everyone...except for the part where we raise taxes on everyone!! The mental gymnastics here are something to admire.

The right has a majority in Congress and has the executive office. If y'all can't end the drug war now, y'all own it.

 

[danielpalos]

From what I've read, the Republican tax plan is supposed to be "revenue-neutral", which means it's not actually a tax cut anyway.

Why do the one percent, need a tax cut when we have massive debt?

 

[danielpalos]

If the goal is reducing government, tax cuts are a mistake. We should raise taxes, across the board, until the budget balances. Then we can have an honest discussion about how much government we really want.

True. When government says you can have big bennies without paying for them, as Bush did and as Trump is doing, people demand more of those freebies. When you make it clear that freebies aren't free, people want less of them.

Notice how mamooth seems to think obama never did anything of the sort? The hypocrisy is amazing.

The rich got their bailout, not blacks.

 

[danielpalos]

If the goal is reducing government, tax cuts are a mistake. We should raise taxes, across the board, until the budget balances. Then we can have an honest discussion about how much government we really want.

True. When government says you can have big bennies without paying for them, as Bush did and as Trump is doing, people demand more of those freebies. When you make it clear that freebies aren't free, people want less of them.

But let's keep on voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford in the first place then charge American citizens for it, wether they use them or not, to teach Americans how much it is actually costing them. Yayy!! Free college for everyone...except for the part where we raise taxes on everyone!! The mental gymnastics here are something to admire.

The point is to stop "voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford". That isn't going to happen if no one is actually paying the bills. There's simply no incentive to pinch pennies when you're using someone else's credit card.

We have a Congress not a Senatus.

 

[dblack]

From what I've read, the Republican tax plan is supposed to be "revenue-neutral", which means it's not actually a tax cut anyway.

Why do the one percent, need a tax cut when we have massive debt?

Beats me. I'm more interested in cutting government than cutting taxes.

 

[Rustic]

Can you progressives be any more retarded? Debt has been ever present for decades... lol

where the **** is the surplus asswipe?

Wow. You're such an imbecile, you literally don't know the difference between "debt" and "deficit". I'd heard that people who are that stupid exist, but I'd never encountered one before.

Oh, the other conservatives want you to go away, because you're embarrassing them so badly.

(And the sad thing is, your vote counts as much as a normal person's.)

All that matters is debt, the country has been not living within its means for decades.
And progressives/socialists/deadbeats cannot expect the prosperous and successful to fit the bill. Socialism has totally fucked this country over and up, they the entitled nanny state people think they can expect other people to take care of them - **** that! **** that! **** that!
Lol

end the drug war, right winger; we don't need a nanny State with the other Peoples' tax monies.

I'm all for ending the drug war, I've always said that. But what we have now with the socialists establishment programs is a nanny state... there will always be more money going out then coming in and that sort of situation it's a socialism thing you may not understand…

 

[Rustic]

There is not enough money in the United States if you taxed 100% of everything everyone owns, you would not even put a dent in the debt. shit for brains
It's far too large to be able to pay back

Where do you get that idea? I've seen US GDP for 2015 estimated at a bit over $18 trillion.

United States GDP | 1960-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

 

[bendog]

Where do you get that idea? I've seen US GDP for 2015 estimated at a bit over $18 trillion.

United States GDP | 1960-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

dude, the debt is meaningless. The target is just balancing the frigging budget.

 

[Rustic]

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

dude, the debt is meaningless. The target is just balancing the frigging budget.

I see, the debt is meaningless...
you do realize that the person/entity is slave to the lender?

Nice try grasshopper

 

[dblack]

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

dude, the debt is meaningless. The target is just balancing the frigging budget.

It's not meaningless, but getting a handle in current spending should be the priority.

 

[bendog]

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

dude, the debt is meaningless. The target is just balancing the frigging budget.

It's not meaningless, but getting a handle in current spending should be the priority.

If we stop running structural deficits, then in the debt will be inconsequential because the economy will grow in % to the debt.

 

[sakinago]

If the goal is reducing government, tax cuts are a mistake. We should raise taxes, across the board, until the budget balances. Then we can have an honest discussion about how much government we really want.

True. When government says you can have big bennies without paying for them, as Bush did and as Trump is doing, people demand more of those freebies. When you make it clear that freebies aren't free, people want less of them.

But let's keep on voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford in the first place then charge American citizens for it, wether they use them or not, to teach Americans how much it is actually costing them. Yayy!! Free college for everyone...except for the part where we raise taxes on everyone!! The mental gymnastics here are something to admire.

The point is to stop "voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford". That isn't going to happen if no one is actually paying the bills. There's simply no incentive to pinch pennies when you're using someone else's credit card.

So it's the fault of the people voting for politicians promising all these things, and saying we need these, despite knowing full well it's unaffordable? So now politicians need to punish and teach them to not vote for them after they've promised all this free stuff, we're not supposed to believe them huh?

 

[Montrovant]

Where do you get that idea? I've seen US GDP for 2015 estimated at a bit over $18 trillion.

United States GDP | 1960-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

Again, that $200 trillion+ number is, from what I read, projected or future debt and not current debt. You keep saying the debt is higher than $200 trillion, but that's not the case; or are you saying that the unfunded liabilities are current debt?

 

[dblack]

The point is to stop "voting for subsidies, benifits, welfare, pensions we can't afford". That isn't going to happen if no one is actually paying the bills. There's simply no incentive to pinch pennies when you're using someone else's credit card.

So it's the fault of the people voting for politicians promising all these things, and saying we need these, despite knowing full well it's unaffordable?

Ultimately, yes.

So now politicians need to punish and teach them to not vote for them after they've promised all this free stuff, we're not supposed to believe them huh?

It's not a matter of punishment. Just real feedback. Do you think government should be free?

 

[danielpalos]

From what I've read, the Republican tax plan is supposed to be "revenue-neutral", which means it's not actually a tax cut anyway.

Why do the one percent, need a tax cut when we have massive debt?

Beats me. I'm more interested in cutting government than cutting taxes.

If the right wing can't abolish the drug war now, they Own it.

 

[danielpalos]

Can you progressives be any more retarded? Debt has been ever present for decades... lol

where the **** is the surplus asswipe?

Wow. You're such an imbecile, you literally don't know the difference between "debt" and "deficit". I'd heard that people who are that stupid exist, but I'd never encountered one before.

Oh, the other conservatives want you to go away, because you're embarrassing them so badly.

(And the sad thing is, your vote counts as much as a normal person's.)

All that matters is debt, the country has been not living within its means for decades.
And progressives/socialists/deadbeats cannot expect the prosperous and successful to fit the bill. Socialism has totally fucked this country over and up, they the entitled nanny state people think they can expect other people to take care of them - **** that! **** that! **** that!
Lol

end the drug war, right winger; we don't need a nanny State with the other Peoples' tax monies.

I'm all for ending the drug war, I've always said that. But what we have now with the socialists establishment programs is a nanny state... there will always be more money going out then coming in and that sort of situation it's a socialism thing you may not understand…

Then lets end the drug war, to slow down the "leak".

 

[danielpalos]

Where do you get that idea? I've seen US GDP for 2015 estimated at a bit over $18 trillion.

United States GDP | 1960-2017 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast | News

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

I don't take the right wing seriously about economics or the law.

 

[Rustic]

If you take the debt and the unfunded liabilities which are debt - the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars

It is my understanding that the $200+ trillion number is based on future spending and governmental income, not current numbers. The unfunded liabilities are based on something called an infinite-horizon financial gap. I'm perfectly willing to believe that, based on current spending, debt, tax laws, etc., that the debt will reach that total, but I don't believe it can be considered current debt.

I would say the debt is going to get even worse than expected, many times over because of the federal government/career politicians they always overspend. Less people are putting less in and more people are taking more out of socialist entitlement programs....

Raise taxes on the one percent until our debt is gone.

You could tax 100% of everything the top 10% have and it would not even pay off a fraction of a fraction, of a fraction of the country's debt… Fact
You can't be that ******* stupid, the debt is north of $225 trillion dollars… There's not enough money in the world to pay that off.
Why tax the wealthy, prosperous and successful for other peoples **** ups? The Collective is strong in you... lol

I don't take the right wing seriously about economics or the law.

Progressive budgeting…