Well, but -- The Rosewater Foundation, Rosewater, Indiana

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 20:10:19 07/21/11 Thu
Author: Paul Davis
Subject: Well, but
In reply to: Jeffman 's message, "Re: Back from vacation" on 07:40:07 07/20/11 Wed

Trouble I have is that everyone wants to use funny math.

If you want to actually fix this, not just play games with it, you have to take some real actions.

You'd have to roll back all the tax cuts/law changes to about 1999. And that's a tax increase for everyone.

Then you do indeed have to cut spending. And that's more of that funny math, because when congress says a trillion, they mean a trillion over ten years. Which is actually 100 billion. So by congress math, you'd have to cut 5 trillion.

Do both of those, and you'd come up with next year having about 400 billion deficit, which is a lot, but we can live with it.

That's a lot of cutting. And a lot of tax. And it doesn't solve the problem, but it does mitigate the hell out of it.

I estimate the chances of something like that being done this year at about .01%.

Additional note here: Of the last six trillion added to the national debt, 3 were added to pay for wars, 2 were added to pay for bailouts and stimulus, and one was added due to entitlement programs, mostly unemployment. If you listen to the news, you'd think it was all entitlements. So much for actual reporting.

>The not so funny thing here is that we are talking
>about cutting the deficit by a trillion when its 4
>trillion. Thats hardly a tap on the brakes. Remember
>not debt, deficit. Which means we would still go in
>debt another 2 trillion dollars.
>
>I have one thing to say about it. CUT SPENDING! You
>could suck in all the money that all the upper 5% of
>wage earners in America earn (tax at 100%)and still
>not make a dent in 4 trillion dollars of deficits.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]