How much military gear could we have gotten for what we spent on the Mueller probe?

PowerStroker wrote:

---

Everyone except deficit hawks, which used to be you guys.

---

Deficit is about how much is spent....when you spend more than the revenue from taxation brings in the result is deficit spending which adds to our debt...

The government should be heavily constrained on how much it can tax...then it is the job of congress to only spend what we can afford under that taxation...

you do not raise taxes to resolve the deficit...you have to cut spending...

neither side has done well with cutting spending....

that was the big problem under Reagan...He allowed Congress to spend unfettered...and in doing so tripled our national debt and by the time Reagan had left office only the top 3% still had any part of his earlier tax cuts...

PowerStroker wrote:

---

There is an often floated idea of a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Where the Federal government would have to operate like the individual states and balance their budget annually. In principal I would support such a thing, just so long as the way the balancing of the budget is done is a mix of spending cuts and revenue increases (not just cuts). Of course in times of dire need like WW2, Congress could vote to temporarily suspend said rule for things that a super-majority agree is truly an emergency.

---

As long as YOU understand that increased revenue does not mean an increased tax rate....

The tax rate should be stable....progressive but stable....

Those at the top should pay more...and they do...they always have....

Those at the bottom should have skin in the game also and too many do not....

what we need is an amendment to the EITC...stating the credit can never exceed the tax liability of the individual...

That would likely correct the deficit over night....

PowerStroker wrote:

---

How about creating a fee on certain things, like the derivatives and credit default swaps that blew up the economy last time? Even a 2% fee on each of those would probably go a long way toward putting us back in the black.

---

IMHO credit default swaps should be illegal....

commercial banks should never have been allowed to sell off their debt to investment banks...which is how that vehicle was created to begin with...

it is ALSO that same issue that put the TAX PAYER on the hook via FDIC protections on the commercial side...

PowerStroker wrote:

---

Amen brother, they probably should be illegal I agree. But until they are, maybe Uncle Sam can charge a percentage on them to balance the budget without having to raise income taxes. It sounds like a bipartisan solution to me.

---

Again balancing the budget is ALL about spending cuts....

and no that does not mean Social Security cuts as those have no impact on the deficit at all....

nor do cuts to Medicare neither of those programs are funded through the discretionary budget....they have their own dedicated tax....

there are MANY things our government could stop spending money on that would more than balance the budget....only those in congress do not want to make those cuts...

 You have many times knocked Donald Trump changes to taxation....

They were the correct changes...

they were not targeted at billionaires...

capital gain tax (corporate taxation) does not HURT the billionaire or effect their profit as those cost are ALL passed along to the consumer....

what the corporate tax cuts did was bring companies back inside the US....companies that have been fleeing since Clinton was in office...

The FICA surplus that disappeared in 2015, went away because of lack of participation in the work force....

you do not have to raise taxes to increase revenue, simply tax the same, but increase the number of people participating in the work force...revenue goes up...

while we did raise the cap on FICA slightly...(as we should have) that alone was not near enough to bring back the surplus...all the added jobs when companies returned....that is why the FICA surplus is BACK...

These are the fine points democrats like to ignore as it does not jive with their narrative...

-- Edited by Nuffan on Saturday 20th of April 2019 01:29:25 PM

Shawnee_B wrote:

---

It's so easy to spend someone else money, just ask AOC

---

This is WHY the answer is ALWAYS to cut spending....

It is TOO EASY to spend the money of others....

Cutting spending is actually HARD to do...

The predicted cost of the tax cuts was well over one trillion dollars in 2018...however the increased revenue by adding to the work force made the actual deficit under 800 billion...over 400 billion below the predicted amount...

the difference is the increased revenue due to added participation...now democrats want to look and say had we not cut taxes we would have had much higher revenues...we also would not have seen the increased participation which is better across the longer term...

taxing less is better over all...it keeps growth up, and over the course of a few years the additional revenue from that participation growth will out weigh the initial loss from the lower tax rate...

now if we can get the congress to take the next step since we have the tax rate at a good level adjust spending to that and walla balanced budget with the LOWER tax rates but increasing participation rates

The bottom 10% in America tend to live better than lower 50% anywhere else...

Powerstroker needs to embrace we should spend our energy with regulation to make default swaps on commercially backed securities illegal, not taxing the transactions...

It is TOO EASY to justify taking money from other people...and democrats have a bad habit of using any EXCUSE to take MORE...