Random questions on the coming debt ceiling.......

Let me break it down for you retards..I'm gonna make it real simple so even you brainwashed birdbrains can understand. Here's the situation:

We are spending a huge pile of money or things we need over here..... And
We are spending a even biggers pile of money on stuff we don't need over there..And
We arent taking in enough revenue..

Now i'm no economist but I say we increase revenue's (tax's) while cutting spending on the things we don't need. Like a Defense budget that is bigger than the rest of the worlds combined when we have no real enemies...

Make sense guys?

The reducing of the spending does VL, but not the increasing of the taxes. The federated government has consistently realized around 18% of the national GDP in taxes since WWII regardless of tax rates. That's all they are going to get regardless of the rates at which they tax us, so the only thing that makes sense is for the federated government to limit its spending to an amount that is less than 18% of the GDP, not expand its spending to 25% of GDP as the current administration has done.

The "mandatory" spending items cost us 325% more than the entire DoD budget. Not the money spent fighting the wars, the entire Defense budget. When you subtract the "mandatory" spending from the tax revenues received you are left with a whopping $208 Billion to fund every other function of the federated government. Defense, Transportation, Judiciary, EPA, Interior, Education, Secretary of State, the administration offices of Social Security, Treasury, disaster relief, Corps of Engineers and all the rest of it. If, on the other hand, you remove the invented "mandatory" spending items that represent the federated government's intrusion into the domestic sovereignty of the states, along with the $1 Trillion worth of revenue realized from the privilege taxes that fund them, what you are left with is $1.378 Trillion in spending on all of the above plus $164 Billion worth of interest on the debt for a total of $1.542 Trillion in total spending and $1.381 Trillion in tax revenues. Toss out the spending on education, which is also a state concern, HHS, HUD, and SS Administration and you are left with about $1.36 Trillion in total spending - a balanced budget.

Clearly it is the intrusion into the individual welfare of the citizens of the states that is responsible for the obscene deficits, not that the citizens of the states in the union and the businesses in those states are taxed too little.

More from Jefferson to Epps, written on September 11, 1813 from his Poplar Forest retreat:

There have existed nations, and civilized and learned nations, who have thought that a father has a right to sell his child as a slave, in perpetuity; that he could alienate his body and industry conjointly, and a fortiori (with even stronger reason) his industry separately; and consume its fruits himself. A nation asserting this fratricide right might well suppose they could burthen with public as well a private debt their "nati natorum, et qui nascentur at illis" (their children's children and their descendants). But we, this age, and in this nation especially, are advanced beyond those notions of natural law. We acknowledge that our children are born free; that that freedom is the gift of nature, and not of him who begot them; that though under our care during infancy, and therefore of necessity under a duly tempered authority, that care is confided to us to be exercised for the preservation and good of the child only; and his labors during youth are given as a retribution for the charges of infancy. As he was never the property of his father, so when adult he is sui juris (of one's own law), entitled himself to the use of his own limbs and the fruit of his own exertions: so far we are advanced, without mind enough, it seems, to take the whole step. We believe, or we act as if we believed, that although an individual father cannot alienate the labor of his son, the aggregate body of fathers may alienate the labor of all of their sons, of their posterity, in the aggregate, and oblige them to pay for all the enterprises, just or unjust, profitable or ruinous, into which our vices, our passions, or our personal interests may lead us. But I trust that this proposition needs only to be looked at by an American to be seen in its true point of view, and that we shall all consider ourselves unauthorized to saddle posterity with our debts, and morally bound to pay them ourselves; and consequently within what may be deemed the period of a generation, or the life of the majority.

Are there any among us who think we can pay the current $14 Trillion in debt off in our lifetimes, let alone any amount that the Congress may wish to add to that which already exists? And how can we square this sentiment, which I presume all would agree, with the institutions of Social Security and Medicare which do nothing if the do not saddle the posterity and obligate them to pay for the enterprises that serve our own personal interests?