Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's what Clinton did and imo it worked pretty damn well. My right wing buddies say they want spending cuts and no tax increases, and my left wing buddies want tax increases and no spending cuts. Doesn't it make sense that if there is a large deficit to both increase taxes minimally (back to Clinton era rates) and cut spending aggressively?
If we rolled our tax rates back to the Clinton era, it would put a lot of strain on the poor and lower middle class. The bottom most tax rates go up by 50%, deductions and credits for children go down and the marriage penalty returns. Plus of course we repeal the payroll tax cuts, which hit the lower incomes the hardest.
I would agree with some of this, IF we were willing to make actual spending cuts, not cuts in the rate of increase or cuts from some wish list. If we were to look at actual year to year federal spending and increase revenue by say $.50 for every $1.00 cut in spending, yes, I could agree with an increase. Until we get spending under some degree of control, no.
I think reforming our tax code and making MAJOR spending cuts....do we really need the "rural electrifcation bureau" anymore....The folks we elect need to be mindful of the money they're spending....it doesn't belong them!
We can reduce tax rates, and still take in more tax money IF the economy is strong and growing.
That's what Clinton did and imo it worked pretty damn well. My right wing buddies say they want spending cuts and no tax increases, and my left wing buddies want tax increases and no spending cuts. Doesn't it make sense that if there is a large deficit to both increase taxes minimally (back to Clinton era rates) and cut spending aggressively?
Well,Bush 1 tried it. We got the tax increase,but not a real cut in spending. Believe it or not,most Republicans used to oppose tax cuts,as they were more concerned with the deficit than with growth. They opposed JFK's tax cut. Not until Jack Kemp came along did Republicans finally start trying to grow the economy and get away from "green eye shade"dour Republicanism.
That's what Clinton did and imo it worked pretty damn well. My right wing buddies say they want spending cuts and no tax increases, and my left wing buddies want tax increases and no spending cuts.
I seriously doubt your claim. I don't know any liberals, either personally or in the public eye, who take the position that there should be no spending cuts as part of a deficit reduction plan.
That's what Clinton did and imo it worked pretty damn well. My right wing buddies say they want spending cuts and no tax increases, and my left wing buddies want tax increases and no spending cuts. Doesn't it make sense that if there is a large deficit to both increase taxes minimally (back to Clinton era rates) and cut spending aggressively?
No, thats not what Clinton did. Clinton raised taxes which was harmful to the economy. It wasnt until Clinton cut captial gains rains from 28% to 20%, and cut taxes on 90% of small businesses did things turn out pretty dam well.
Furthermore, Clintons cut in spending, wasnt real cuts either. They simply cut the rate of growth.
That's what Clinton did and imo it worked pretty damn well. My right wing buddies say they want spending cuts and no tax increases, and my left wing buddies want tax increases and no spending cuts. Doesn't it make sense that if there is a large deficit to both increase taxes minimally (back to Clinton era rates) and cut spending aggressively?
It would be very painful in the short term, because you'd cause deflation by reducing the money in circulation. You'd see more firing, less hiring, while we slooooooooooowly work off the public and private debt we've created. It's sort of like starving ourselves on purpose.
In the long run it might be good, but that's exactly why it isn't happening. Politicians are elected on short-term performance not long-term performance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
