Even Republicans cannot make socialism work!
Well, duh. Incurring expenses that you can't pay for (assuming that it wasn't the result of a calamity that could not have been reasonably foreseen) is the mark of a damfool, and damfools deserve ridicule (if only because that's the most humane way of encouraging them to stop doing damfool things in the future).
The next GOP tax cut ought to be targeted explicitly to married couples with children
Targeted tax cuts are socialism (except that socialism is at least honest about the fact that the government is usurping your decisions).
Michael J. Graetz of Yale Law School, hardly a wild-eyed utopian, has called this the "back to the future" plan. Graetz would raise the AMT exemption to $50,000 for single-earners and $100,000 for joint returns, and impose a single rate of 25 percent on all earnings over those thresholds. To replace the lost revenue, he would also -- and this is the controversial part -- introduce a consumption tax of 14 percent.
How about introducing some SPENDING CUTS???
It would hit the idle rich -- affluent retirees drawing down their savings, trust fund babies buying penthouse apartments -- hardest, while the productive rich, and their income from investments and business ventures, would emerge considerably less scathed.
If I wanted to read this sort of class-warfare crap, I'd surf over to the DUmpster. The money spent by the so-called "idle rich" wasn't conjured into existence by magic -- it came from the same people (or their families, a concept the author claims to support) during their days among the "productive rich". It is thus impossible to punish the former without equally punishing the latter.
Yeesh, maybe I should ping PJ-Comix -- the Weak Substandard looks like a potential source of comedy material for those days when the DUmmie ants are too listless to crank out prime-grade drivel.
He seems to be doing that a lot, lately.