Wealth Tax: Yeah! Why do Warren Buffett and Bill gates need so much money in their Trust?

[Blues Man]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

It's all cumulative.

We are still paying for the deficits from 1929.

And why don;t you show me where government has ever actually cut spending in all that time? There is absolutely no reason to think that government will ever cut spending even if taxes are raised.

The first Bush raised taxes and then spending cuts lead to lower deficits during Clinton.

So what if deficits were lower? Overall spending increased and Clinton left a larger debt than he inherited.

And don't try to minimize the effects of the tech bubble on revenues either.

Clinton just got lucky that that particular bubble didn't burst on his watch

Deficits declined, that’s a big deal. By comparison they increased with Reagan, bushes, Trump... if they always declined debt would shrink as a percent of gdp

it doesn't really matter as the debt still grew so IOW Clinton still spent more than government revenue.

You said increased taxes lead to spending cuts and they don't. All increased revenue does is give corrupt politicians more to spend and spend they will.

You are lying to yourself. Decreasing deficits matter. You just aren’t fiscally responsible.

But they don't all that matters is the increasing debt.

And like I said Clinton didn't decrease spending he benefited from the tech bubble and the additional tax revenues it brought in and he was just lucky enough that that bubble didn't burst until right after he left office.

You need to look at the whole picture not just the parts you cherry pick

 

[Brain357]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

It's all cumulative.

We are still paying for the deficits from 1929.

And why don;t you show me where government has ever actually cut spending in all that time? There is absolutely no reason to think that government will ever cut spending even if taxes are raised.

The first Bush raised taxes and then spending cuts lead to lower deficits during Clinton.

So what if deficits were lower? Overall spending increased and Clinton left a larger debt than he inherited.

And don't try to minimize the effects of the tech bubble on revenues either.

Clinton just got lucky that that particular bubble didn't burst on his watch

Deficits declined, that’s a big deal. By comparison they increased with Reagan, bushes, Trump... if they always declined debt would shrink as a percent of gdp

it doesn't really matter as the debt still grew so IOW Clinton still spent more than government revenue.

You said increased taxes lead to spending cuts and they don't. All increased revenue does is give corrupt politicians more to spend and spend they will.

You are lying to yourself. Decreasing deficits matter. You just aren’t fiscally responsible.

But they don't all that matters is the increasing debt.

And like I said Clinton didn't decrease spending he benefited from the tech bubble and the additional tax revenues it brought in and he was just lucky enough that that bubble didn't burst until right after he left office.

You need to look at the whole picture not just the parts you cherry pick

Debt increases a lot faster with increasing deficits. Had we maintained low deficits after Clinton the debt would be a fraction of what it is now. Your arguments are bad math...

 

[dblack]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

I think if the taxation power were used exclusively for generating revenue we'd have more agreement on the issue. Unfortunately it's not. Congress uses the taxation power as a carrot and stick to implement various social engineering goals. If we put a stop that it would clean things up a lot. It would also close a loophole that Congress uses to steer around Constitutional limits on government power.

 

[jc456]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

It's all cumulative.

We are still paying for the deficits from 1929.

And why don;t you show me where government has ever actually cut spending in all that time? There is absolutely no reason to think that government will ever cut spending even if taxes are raised.

The first Bush raised taxes and then spending cuts lead to lower deficits during Clinton.

So what if deficits were lower? Overall spending increased and Clinton left a larger debt than he inherited.

And don't try to minimize the effects of the tech bubble on revenues either.

Clinton just got lucky that that particular bubble didn't burst on his watch

Deficits declined, that’s a big deal. By comparison they increased with Reagan, bushes, Trump... if they always declined debt would shrink as a percent of gdp

Post #194

Yeah you are ignoring all facts. Go figure.

Which facts?

 

[jc456]

One thing is for certain. Every time we cut taxes, deficits increase drastically.

you still don't get it. And, it proves that tax cuts create more revenue. See congress sees more money and increases spending. Son, you can't win this debate. the only way to stop a deficit or debt is to stop spending more than one has in revenue. It's quite simple. Must be why you don't get it.

Trump tax cuts caused us to lose more than any other developed country in 2018.

Tax. Revenue was off the charts! You’re incorrect demofk

 

[jc456]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

I think if the taxation power were used exclusively for generating revenue we'd have more agreement on the issue. Unfortunately it's not. Congress uses the taxation power as a carrot and stick to implement various social engineering goals. If we put a stop that it would clean things up a lot. It would also close a loophole the Congress uses to steer around Constitutional limits on government power.

Ding, ding ding

 

[jc456]

One thing is for certain. Every time we cut taxes, deficits increase drastically.

you still don't get it. And, it proves that tax cuts create more revenue. See congress sees more money and increases spending. Son, you can't win this debate. the only way to stop a deficit or debt is to stop spending more than one has in revenue. It's quite simple. Must be why you don't get it.

I just proved Trump tax cuts hurt revenue. And he increased spending. The Bush tax increase led to lowering deficits. You are losing badly.

How did you prove anything? Lol

 

[jc456]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

It's all cumulative.

We are still paying for the deficits from 1929.

And why don;t you show me where government has ever actually cut spending in all that time? There is absolutely no reason to think that government will ever cut spending even if taxes are raised.

The first Bush raised taxes and then spending cuts lead to lower deficits during Clinton.

So what if deficits were lower? Overall spending increased and Clinton left a larger debt than he inherited.

And don't try to minimize the effects of the tech bubble on revenues either.

Clinton just got lucky that that particular bubble didn't burst on his watch

Deficits declined, that’s a big deal. By comparison they increased with Reagan, bushes, Trump... if they always declined debt would shrink as a percent of gdp

it doesn't really matter as the debt still grew so IOW Clinton still spent more than government revenue.

You said increased taxes lead to spending cuts and they don't. All increased revenue does is give corrupt politicians more to spend and spend they will.

Factually speaking, increased taxes causes revenue declines

 

[danielpalos]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

Raise the minimum wage until we can balance the budget.

 

[Blues Man]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

It's all cumulative.

We are still paying for the deficits from 1929.

And why don;t you show me where government has ever actually cut spending in all that time? There is absolutely no reason to think that government will ever cut spending even if taxes are raised.

The first Bush raised taxes and then spending cuts lead to lower deficits during Clinton.

So what if deficits were lower? Overall spending increased and Clinton left a larger debt than he inherited.

And don't try to minimize the effects of the tech bubble on revenues either.

Clinton just got lucky that that particular bubble didn't burst on his watch

Deficits declined, that’s a big deal. By comparison they increased with Reagan, bushes, Trump... if they always declined debt would shrink as a percent of gdp

it doesn't really matter as the debt still grew so IOW Clinton still spent more than government revenue.

You said increased taxes lead to spending cuts and they don't. All increased revenue does is give corrupt politicians more to spend and spend they will.

You are lying to yourself. Decreasing deficits matter. You just aren’t fiscally responsible.

But they don't all that matters is the increasing debt.

And like I said Clinton didn't decrease spending he benefited from the tech bubble and the additional tax revenues it brought in and he was just lucky enough that that bubble didn't burst until right after he left office.

You need to look at the whole picture not just the parts you cherry pick

Debt increases a lot faster with increasing deficits. Had we maintained low deficits after Clinton the debt would be a fraction of what it is now. Your arguments are bad math...

I don't deal with ifs buts and maybes.

I deal with the facts.

The fact is that increased taxes has never resulted in a spending cut. We have been running deficits for almost 100 years no matter which party was in office. In the big picture it doesn't matter that one guys deficits might have been a little less than another's because it's all cumulative.

You partisans love Clinton but you ignore the fact that the tech bubble is what propped up the economy in his last couple years and he just got lucky that the tech recession happened just a few months after he left office.

You leave out that Clinton's deregulation allowed the entire too big to fail scenario to happen in the first place.

You are utterly incapable of seeing the big picture because you are unable to see the reality that a president's policies play a role in future economies and don't just stop after the next election.

 

[dudmuck]

One thing is for certain. Every time we cut taxes, deficits increase drastically.

you still don't get it. And, it proves that tax cuts create more revenue. See congress sees more money and increases spending. Son, you can't win this debate. the only way to stop a deficit or debt is to stop spending more than one has in revenue. It's quite simple. Must be why you don't get it.

Trump tax cuts caused us to lose more than any other developed country in 2018.

Tax. Revenue was off the charts! You’re incorrect demofk

From 2017 to 2018, the U.S. tax-to-GDP ratio fell from 26.8% to 24.3%, the OECD found, while corporate tax revenues fell by .7% and personal income tax revenues dropped by .5%.

off the charts going down.

 

[dblack]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

Raise the minimum wage until we can balance the budget.

Props to daniel! Usually his stuff is just inscrutable - but this is flat out funny.

 

[Blues Man]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

Raise the minimum wage until we can balance the budget.

Props to daniel! Usually his stuff is just inscrutable - but this flat out funny.

it's not nice to make fun of the special needs students.

 

[Dana7360]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

I would add before Reagan, the debt we owed, was to American citizens. We didn't sell bonds and borrow from other nations like we do now with china and other nations.

It started in the reagan years. In that time it was Japan. Japan is also the first nation our jobs were sent to.

Now our debt is with other nations around the world.

Not to American citizens.

 

[danielpalos]

You leave out that Clinton's deregulation allowed the entire too big to fail scenario to happen in the first place.

So much for "free market" capitalism?

 

[Blues Man]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

But, the problem with that is, if we get into this idea that, hey, if we need more money, then we can just raise taxes. It gives no incentive to reduce spending if government thinks they can keep raising taxes to cover spending.

You have to cut spending because there is a limit to how much you can tax the people. At some point, people will be giving more money to the government than they keep for themselves....we're almost already there.

People in general don't care, and don't even think about the debt, they think about how much money they have in their paychecks. Most people don't even realize what the government is using all of their money for, they just take it for granted that "when payday comes, the government gets their cut and I get mine".

When you raise taxes, government doesn't say "oh hey, we have more money, let's do something so we can lower taxes later", they say "hey, we have more money now, so we can spend more" or, often, "we have to raise taxes to cover what we've already spent".

The debt ceiling keeps going up and up, every year it seems like we run into the debt ceiling and they keep raising it. That represents money that has to be paid back to someone, with interest. If you keep incurring debt, you can't make the payments if you never increase taxes. This is why I think we need to focus on spending cuts. We have to get spending under control so we can maybe someday lower taxes.

I'm no economist, but I did stay at a holiday Inn express last night......and I also realize that if you keep borrowing more money, you have to keep increasing your taxes to cover that borrowing.

Tax payers will only pay so much before anger.

Most tax payers have no clue what they actually pay in taxes.

They know how much their paychecks are. When a tax increase cuts pay, they will not be happy. Everyone loves their freebies now. The right loves military spending cause they have never paid for it. The left loves big gov cause they don’t pay for it. Everybody hates taxes...

All they know is the net.

Most people have absolutely no clue how much they pay in taxes besides no one is talking about raising taxes on most working people

Don’t underestimate the rich influence on politics. If they are unhappy about a tax increase, policy will be to cut spending.

It hasn't happened yet and the rich have owned our political system for 200 years.

And they pay drastically less in taxes. Tax cuts fuel big gov.

Even when the rich paid 70% the government never cut spending.

If you give the government more revenue they will simply spend that too.

In reality the government doesn't care how much revenue they take in they will spend more every year no matter what.

Yet we didn’t have a deficit problem back then . Deficit problems started with Reagan who cut taxes...

We've been running deficits almost every year since 1929

And they weren’t a large percent of gdp till the 80s. Obviously small deficits are not a big problem.

I would add before Reagan, the debt we owed, was to American citizens. We didn't sell bonds and borrow from other nations like we do now with china and other nations.

It started in the reagan years. In that time it was Japan. Japan is also the first nation our jobs were sent to.

Now our debt is with other nations around the world.

Not to American citizens.

Most of the debt is still owned by Americans.

In fact about a quarter of the debt isn't even debt at all because it's money the government owes itself.

6.8 trillion of the rest is owed to foreign governments and the rest is owned by Americans.

 

[Blues Man]

You leave out that Clinton's deregulation allowed the entire too big to fail scenario to happen in the first place.

So much for "free market" capitalism?

there has never been any such thing

 

[dblack]

You leave out that Clinton's deregulation allowed the entire too big to fail scenario to happen in the first place.

So much for "free market" capitalism?

there has never been any such thing

So are you rejecting free market principles? Why?

 

[Blues Man]

You leave out that Clinton's deregulation allowed the entire too big to fail scenario to happen in the first place.

So much for "free market" capitalism?

there has never been any such thing

So are you rejecting free market principles? Why?

I am stating a fact. Why do you have a problem with facts?

There has never been nor will there ever be an economic system unencumbered by law.

 

[Dana7360]

We will need to pay off debt somehow.

We need to stop spending---------making billionaires and politicians richer.

I would argue we need to stop cutting taxes and require a tax increase for any spending. We keep cutting taxes so nobody cares about debt. They will care when taxes increase.

Why is it always increase taxes rather than cut spending? If we cut out all the frivolous spending, we wouldn't need to keep raising taxes.

Also, its impossible to pay off the debt as there is more money owed than there is in existence. Every dollar borrowed is borrowed with interest, even if you gave back every dollar that was ever borrowed, you'd still owe the interest, which can only be paid by borrowing more money.

Its an endless cycle that can only be slowed by decreasing the rate of spending.

Because nobody cares about debt without a tax increase. Remember the tea party? They complained and complained about debt until they got tax cuts and then they disappeared. Meanwhile deficits increased drastically. The only way spending cuts will happen is if we get a tax increase and make people care about debt. Nobody cares about debt, they care about taxes.

increasing taxes has never paid down the deficit ....when DC gets more money they spend it and enrich their family friends and allies . the more they get the more they spend the more they spend the more they steal.

But it has. The first Bush increased taxes and that made people care about debt. Deficits drastically increased under Clinton due to this.

Deficits didn't increase under Clinton.

In fact, by Clinton's second term, the deficit was eliminated with billions in surplus.

Clinton raised taxes on the rich when he first came into office. None of the republicans voted for it.

Clinton raised taxes on the rich and cut spending.

He left a balanced budget with billions in surplus and a plan to have the reagan/bush national debt paid off by 2010. He also paid back all the money that had been stolen from the social security fund. Took it out of the red and back into the black.

Too bad the republicans and the bush boy trashed it.

The Republicans are the ones who caused that surplus. Again, you can go read Clinton's proposed budgets, and budget projections. Not one... not even one of them, projected a surplus. Or even a reduction in debt.

In fact, it was only because Bill Clinton's stimulus package in 1993, was shot down as being excessive.

G.O.P. Senators Prevail, Sinking Clinton's Economic Stimulus Bill (Published 1993)

www.nytimes.com

The GOP launched a massive effort to destroy Bill Clinton's massive spending bill in 1992. It was just as excessive as Obama's bill, the only difference was, the Democrats pushed Obama's over spending bill through.

In 1993, smarter people prevented it. Then you claim deficits didn't rise under Clinton? Yeah, because of Republicans.

If not for us, Bill Clinton would have tripled the debt.

Facts over opinion. Sorry, you lose.

And when repubs are in full control deficits increase. See Trump first two years. Neither side is good on this issue.

I would add also see the first 6 years of the bush boy.