How about we go back to spending levels of 1999 and keep our money?
We need a Constitutional Amendment stating simply: “NO member of Congress, or the Executive branch or the Judiciary shall draw any salary, wages, benefits or expense reimbursement so long as the Federal budget is in a deficit status. Deficit status shall be defined as spending in excess of revenues.”
Now, THAT will get their attention. Maybe then they would listen to we the people.
ABSOLUTLEY NOT!!!
The very fact that this is even being proposed is evidence that we have forgotten what it even means to be free. We are already being taxed at a rate that can not be accurately described as anything but SLAVERY TO THE GOVERNMENT!
Cut the F*cking federal and state governments to one fourth there current size THEN start working on serious cutbacks.
Freedom does not mean working 50% of your life for Government. Not more than 3% of your working life should go to taxes.
Waste of time. The real purpose of "taxing the rich" is to get even, not to improve the budget. Let me repeat that: Taxing the rich has NOTHING to do with the budget!
And most of the people in favor of confiscating this money know this. Not just in DC, but Joe Citizen. "So it won't balance the budget, it will show those greedy people who have stolen all the wealth I should get for not working".
Spending cuts FIRST, and then and only then do we talk about raising tax rates.
Lack of federal revenue really ain’t the problem here....
Not just NO, but HELLLP NO
Not just NO, but HELLLP NO
how many times do we have to say “Read My Lips” before realizing that this will NEVER happen?
No compromise. No surrender.
Stop the excessive outflow first, then deal with the inflow issue.
Send these dunce pols to plumber school - they don’t know a thing about dealing with stuff like this.
The problem with this is that, among other things, the national debt is much higher now than it was back in the 90’s, we have a new massive entitlement program under Obamacare, and a substantially weaker economy that would collapse with even higher taxes.
Plus, once tax increases are in place, it’s difficult to get rid of them, unlike spending levels, which can easily be upped (thanks to spend happy Dems and RINOs).
In a few more words:
'Heck & Dang No!!!'
Why??
Because not one TOTUS, House or Senate member has suggested the complete elimination of not one of the 155,000 federal agencies, departments, or spending programs.
The seem to be able to create laws establishing such, but, have not one ounce of guts to pull the plug on an over-bloated spend / tax monster!!!
I would accept Clinton tax rates on the following conditions:
Placed a hard limit on spending to 1 percentage point less than the tax revenue as expressed as a percentage of GDP. So if tax revenue was 20% of GDP, then sending ... ALL / TOTAL SPENDING would be limited to 19% of GDP.
AMT was altered so that everyone had to pay at a minimum, the higher of either their normally calculated tax or their gross income times the lowest tax rate.
Why don’t we get out of Iraq and Afghanistan, that alone will reduce our spending by 900 billion out of the 1600 billion deficit. It means in the out years we do not have to borrow 900 billion and with it the interest burden on the ongoing budget. That still leaves us with 700 billion in overspending.