Posted on 04/28/2010 7:17:07 AM PDT by jay1949
Federal spending has passed the point where "mandatory" spending and net payments of interest on the national debt exceed income from all sources -- which means that every dime spent on "discretionary" budget items such as national defense is now borrowed. Question: Do you think the "deficit commission" might propose new taxes? 1. Yes. 2. %#^^ yes. 3. Oh, yeah. 4. All of the above.
(Excerpt) Read more at backcountrynotes.com ...
And yet, since we are on the right-hand side of the peak of the Laffer Curve, a tax increase will decrease revenue to the Treasury. Only a tax cut can increase revenues by encouraging work.
They don’t care about the money. Taxes are chump change. The real money is in inflating the value out of the currency.
Taxes are to control the schlubs.
Even stupid Dems know this. So why propose a tax increase that will kill revenue?
1) To Destroy Western Civilization FASTER.
2) To Control You.
During the Reagan, Bush 1 and Clinton administrations. We hiked taxes and Federal spending exploded. Giving more revenue to DC is a akin to giving free crack to a drug addict thinking it will "fix" their addiction.
The ONLY time we have balanced the budget in the last 45 years has been when Government spending was curbed by a Conservative lead Congress during the late 1990s.
And no, contrary to the Democrat talking point, Clinton and the Democrats did NOT balance the budget with their 1993 tax hikes.
The last Clinton budget plan before the Republicans took over in Jan 1995 projected annual deficits in the $200 billion range for the rest of the decade. His tax hikes did NOTHING to balance the budget.
Democrats want to talk "shared sacrifice" well this time let cut all the supposed "government benefits" we get without the tax hikes. Let those cuts be our "Shared sacrifice".
Don't laugh. When corporations get too big and cannot compete, this is more or less what happens to an industry. Companies spin off IPOs, IPOs merge, other company remnants merge and the industry becomes more efficient. Why should not the US consider this?
I know there are problems -- existing debt, military and so forth, but solutions to these would be part of the equation when states decide to re-assemble.
Federal Spending exploded in part because we could afford it. Tax revenue were exploding. The economy was exploding (in a good way).
Why did all that money suddenly appear?
Because marginal income tax rates were reduced from over 70% to less than 30% under Reagan.
Smart people left the golf course and went to work, because they could keep more of what they created.
Not laughing. As unrealistic as it may seem now, it is too logical an outcome to discount.
You know that. I know that. Even the perps in Warshington, DeeCee mostly know that. But it runs contrary to the current m.o. of Federal politics, i.e., buying votes with tax money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.