Thread: the mighty GOP on debt commision make thar offer!

Originally Posted by adaher

First, I don't see a failure. We get $1.2 trillion in cuts if we hit the Nov. 23 deadline.

Second, while Americans would like the rich to pay a little more to close the deficit, $3 trillion in new taxes, even if it didn't affect anyone but the rich, would cause a backlash. Americans hate taxes, and the fact that other people are being taxed is not going to help the Democrats. Besides, they'd never get $3 trillion, because as I keep saying, Congressmen are rich. Democratic donors are rich. Pass a tax increase that high and Congressmen, their families, and their donors will begin the process of carving out all kinds of new exemptions and in the end they'll end up with $1.5 trillion.

The final thing that has to be taken into account is that the right-wing machine is more savvy than it used to be. As soon as such a bill passed, they'd be waiting with baited breath for the first new exemption that just happened to benefit a major Democratic donor. And you know the Obama administration would be the first to go to Congress hat in hand for someone. And it would be reported on as viciously as Solyndra. In the end, the tax increase would be a disaster for Democrats.

Not to mention the Tea Party will have a list of every single Republican who voted for a tax increase. And they will challenge them in the primaries.

Originally Posted by jviehe

Not to mention the Tea Party will have a list of every single Republican who voted for a tax increase. And they will challenge them in the primaries.

I gotta feeling the TP will lose some of its clout, as middle america suffers more and more, not from the debt but from the economic model Obama inherited. In fact, as the suffering increases for average folks, this debt issue will be moot. It's easy to worry about the debt until you fall out of the social safety nets. And that will change everything.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I gotta feeling the TP will lose some of its clout, as middle america suffers more and more, not from the debt but from the economic model Obama inherited. In fact, as the suffering increases for average folks, this debt issue will be moot. It's easy to worry about the debt until you fall out of the social safety nets. And that will change everything.

So your solution is to go further into debt paying for more social spending?

Have you ever once contemplated what will happen when the US can't borrow any more?

Let the tax rates return to where they were 30 years ago and no borrowing will be necessary.

Originally Posted by 9aces

So your solution is to go further into debt paying for more social spending?

Have you ever once contemplated what will happen when the US can't borrow any more?

I offered no solution. I was just making a statement regarding the clout of the TP, once millions fall off of the unemployment, and other social safety nets are cut by Repubs.

I am fairly certain the worse is still in our future. I don't believe we have seen anything yet of the great social unrest that is just over the hill.

Originally Posted by Jason Marcel

There is absolutely no proof that the Bush tax cuts helped everyone.

I wasn't referring to the macroeconomy, I was referring to the fact that under Bush's plan, everyone who paid taxes got a tax cut. Not so under the Gore plan.

Originally Posted by August West

Let the tax rates return to where they were 30 years ago and no borrowing will be necessary.

Not true. We had a deficit 30 years ago. The govt took 19% of GDP as taxes. This is about 4% more than today. If we went back to those rates, we would still have a trillion dollar deficit. THis is because outlays have gone from 22% to 25%. Now, if you likewise reduce spending to the same rates as 30 years ago, plus another 100bn, THEN no borrowing would be neccesary.

Fun fact, if you went back to the rates of 30 years ago, the share of taxes paid by the top 10% would drop by 25%.

Originally Posted by jviehe

Not to mention the Tea Party will have a list of every single Republican who voted for a tax increase. And they will challenge them in the primaries.

That would be foolish if we get entitlement reform out of it.

Originally Posted by adaher

That would be foolish if we get entitlement reform out of it.

Im referring to the idea of passing a large tax increase to satisfy the supersecret committee.

Originally Posted by wooyarn

Since you stated that with such authority I can only assume that you have studied these loopholes and will have no problem linking to some of these Republican instituted loopholes that the Democrats have closed or tried to close. I also assume that you have some sort of running tally on the number of loopholes instituted by each party. I would really be interested in seeing this info. I try to learn something new everyday and this would give me an early start today.

Nice job calling out the fact that adaher routinely makes assertions that I'm sure he believes, because they are so appealing to all his prejudices, but in fact have zero grounding in fact. I'm guessing here, but I'd say his ratio of assertions to links the support his assertions is about 10,000 to one. Give or take.
Of course, this would be a great opportunity for Adaher to prove me wrong.
But since he didn't prove you wrong, and because I know what he's writing is total bullshit, I won't stay up tonight to read his response.
But it will probably be entertaining, nonetheless. Kinda like a car wreck is entertaining in a sad, tragic sort of way.

Originally Posted by jviehe

Not true. We had a deficit 30 years ago. The govt took 19% of GDP as taxes. This is about 4% more than today. If we went back to those rates, we would still have a trillion dollar deficit. THis is because outlays have gone from 22% to 25%. Now, if you likewise reduce spending to the same rates as 30 years ago, plus another 100bn, THEN no borrowing would be neccesary.

Fun fact, if you went back to the rates of 30 years ago, the share of taxes paid by the top 10% would drop by 25%.

Please provide your evidence for your "fun fact." Because it's utter bullshit. The top 10% paid less as a share of total taxes 30 years ago because they weren't syphoning off as much of the total income as they are now. If we applied those old rates to today's firehose of income accruing to the richest ten percent (actually it's the top one percent who is really seeing the increase in income, and the top point one percent most of all), you'd see a gusher of tax revenue. You're trying to compare apples to oranges.

You make a similar mistake when you try to compare tax income as a percent of GDP. When GDP is growing briskly, the tax income will be a smaller percent of that GDP than say during a recession.

Jeeze.

The tax system 30 years ago generated the same amount of money as a % of GDP as the tax system of the 90s. The rates were higher, but the loopholes were ridiculous. Even moreso than they are now.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I offered no solution. I was just making a statement regarding the clout of the TP, once millions fall off of the unemployment, and other social safety nets are cut by Repubs.

I am fairly certain the worse is still in our future. I don't believe we have seen anything yet of the great social unrest that is just over the hill.

I'm glad our family has land with artisian springs on it. I think in about 30 years, maybe less we're going to need it when it all goes to hell.