100000:1 would be a bad deal.
The increases are instantaneous, the unnamed,unwritten, general ,framework of cuts are down the road with future congressmen that are under no obligation to honor Obama’s vote buys.
Reagan fell for this one twice.
Once on a budget the other on the Amesty.
Morons like this belittle other people’s math skills, but then make glaring mistakes themselves.
He posits that the GOP candidates are just being silly to not accept a deal that would cut $15T of debt in 5 years in exchange for $1.5T in higher taxes. Let’s think about that for a minute. Is cutting $3T EVERY YEAR for five years a real proposal ? Obviously not, since that would leave total spending at only $800B/yr and mean the immediate termination of SS, Medicare, and every other program and Federal employee except for Defense and Homeland Security. So the cuts are FAKE, and no ratio of FAKE cuts to REAL tax increase is acceptable.
Put another way, the current tax revenues are more than sufficient to pay for the remaining $800B/yr of spending, so why would we need a tax increase ?
If they were willing to actually eliminate $1T from the CURRENT budget by eliminating entire Departments so they can’t come back, I might go for it. If, after a year, those cuts were proven true and not simply shifted and renamed spending that popped up somewhere else, the IRS would be allowed to “assess” the taxpayers for an extra $100B at the end of the year at a rate of $320 per each of the 310 million populace. If government failed to save the $1T, then they don’t get the “special assessment” $100B.
My proposal — to do the cuts NOW and do the tax increase LATER — is just as unacceptable to the Progressives as their plan is to conservatives and the GOP candidates — to do the tax increases NOW and spending cuts LATER.