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.
Sounds like you're peachy with the spending and just want to jack taxes to catch up. Thats quite an idea to stimulate the economy
I said you can't have it both ways. You support Obama's cuts, and you will have to pay the price. It is as simple as that.
As for spending, I have said a number of times that if we scale back milirary spending to year 2000 levels, we will save 4 trillion with that alone. See the logic? Lose 4T, and win 4T. Plus, minus = zero.
The dems have controlled congress since 2006 . Look in the mirror the drunken sailor is you.
Both parties are responsible.
For dems it's just part of their "cradle to grave" and"tax and spend" ideology, for GOP'ers it's been "Ill ignore my conservative ideals, to bring home the bacon for my constituents" and the "I'll vote for your's if you'll vote for mine" bi-partisanship, is something Americas budget just can't sustain.
Looking at a 2000 baseline, revenue is down, by about 12% In '06-07, revenues exceeded 2000 levels, after the Bush tax cuts. Yet spending increased a whopping 68%. It's not an income problem, it's a spending problem. We have immature children on both sides of the aisle spending like there is no tomorrow.
In 2000, federal tax receipt was a little over $2 trillion ($2.5 trillion in 2009 dollars).
In 2009, federal tax receipt was about $2.1 trillion, LOWER than we had a decade ago!
Do you think the decline in revenue also adds to the deficit? No? When was the last time we saw this happening? Why did we see this happen?
Looking at a 2000 baseline, revenue is down, by about 12% In '06-07, revenues exceeded 2000 levels, after the Bush tax cuts. Yet spending increased a whopping 68%. It's not an income problem, it's a spending problem. We have immature children on both sides of the aisle spending like there is no tomorrow.
Tax cuts and credits are counted as spending, and a lot of the stimulus came in form of cuts and credits. I find it strange that people cry for cuts and credits and when they get them, they cry about the deficits they create.
very nicely worded. does spending more money add to the deficit or does cutting spending reduce the deficit
I think you should have focused on the content of the post, not just the wordings and how they were put together. Had you done that, you would have noticed a very simple formula:
Deficit = Receipts - Outlays.
Now that I feel the need to explain it... there are two drivers to deficit. You can have a fixed spending for years but if your tax receipts are lower, you would have a deficit. Likewise, you can have fixed tax receipts but if spending is higher, you would have a deficit. And, finally, if you have tax receipts that are lower and spending is higher, you would have a deficit.
Spending is a problem, but so is lower tax receipts. Heck, as I have quoted (twice), 2000 tax receipts was actually higher than 2009 tax receipts. Would you mind explaining how that came about?
I think you should have focused on the content of the post, not just the wordings and how they were put together. Had you done that, you would have noticed a very simple formula:
Deficit = Receipts - Outlays.
Now that I feel the need to explain it... there are two drivers to deficit. You can have a fixed spending for years but if your tax receipts are lower, you would have a deficit. Likewise, you can have fixed tax receipts but if spending is higher, you would have a deficit. And, finally, if you have tax receipts that are lower and spending is higher, you would have a deficit.
Spending is a problem, but so is lower tax receipts. Heck, as I have quoted (twice), 2000 tax receipts was actually higher than 2009 tax receipts. Would you mind explaining how that came about?
So more spending creates more deficits no matter what the receipts are
I think you should have focused on the content of the post, not just the wordings and how they were put together. Had you done that, you would have noticed a very simple formula:
Deficit = Receipts - Outlays.
Now that I feel the need to explain it... there are two drivers to deficit. You can have a fixed spending for years but if your tax receipts are lower, you would have a deficit. Likewise, you can have fixed tax receipts but if spending is higher, you would have a deficit. And, finally, if you have tax receipts that are lower and spending is higher, you would have a deficit.
Spending is a problem, but so is lower tax receipts. Heck, as I have quoted (twice), 2000 tax receipts was actually higher than 2009 tax receipts. Would you mind explaining how that came about?
As I indicated earlier, tax receipts in '06 and '07 (after the Bush tax cuts) were the same or higher than 2000. And 2000 was a record year of receipts to that time. We have little thing called a recession going on, started in mid '08 or so. Reduced income to businesses and individuals means a reduction of tax revenue to the federal government, when tax rates are unchanged. Actual revenues collected reflect this.
To address this, we need to reduce spending and increase income. Income can be theoretically be increased by raising tax rates. This results in less money for individuals and business to spend..potentially leading to economic contraction. This in turn can lead to a reduction in income, even with higher tax rates. Alternatively, government revenue can increase with the same (or lower) tax rates, with a growing economy.
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.