A huge portion of the deficit is due to the Bush tax cuts, anyway you slice it. And when you add in the costs incurred by the two unnecessary wars Bush got us into it, it accounts for a huge portion of the remainder.
It's nice to be a dreamer- I see.
Both wars up to now have cost a total of about 1.3 trillion dollars, and while I think it was an example of spending gone wild, it does not equal 14+ trillion dollars. That's a liberal lefty dream. And that 1.4 trillion is an estimate by a democratic administration. It does not count the economic benefits to the world economy yet to be found by having a friendly Iraq vs one controlled by Sadamn.
The bush tax cuts also can not just be calculated in lost revenue (not stolen) by the government. One must also calculate the benefits of having the money remain in the private sector where it is saved, spent or invested. Many of those dollars did contribute to what little jobs are being created- and if we ever get a business friendly environment- all those dollars will be invested in one way or another, which raise even more tax dollars for the government to steal.
Something the Dog Said wrote: Actually it is Viking that is flat out lying about scare tactics. According to Gallup, which is a well known unbiased polling agency as opposed to Rasmussen, 80% of Americans believe that the deficit can only be reduced with a combination of cuts and taxes, just as President Obama stated. Only 20% believe that the deficit can be reduced with the Republican plan.
Don't expect a response to this....Viking and the other conservatives are quite attached to their lies and misconceptions. They know what they know, and the truth won't change that.
Especially when it is all smoke and mirrors to deflect from all the failed programs and wasteful spending that got us here and will have no effect on our budget what so ever!
It's not all smoke and mirrors. Just do your homework, Viking. The Bush tax cuts REALLY did a number on the deficit, especially combined with the unaddressed systemtic economic problems that have been left unaddressed for decades.
It's really easy to rant about "wasteful" programs but it doesn't solve the basic problem. I don't think there is a person here who likes to pay for "wasteful" programs. We may differ over which we think are worthwhile and which are "wasteful", but no one disagrees that we'd like to see government spending less.
But unfortunately, even if we cut out every single "wasteful" program, and even ones we all agreed were NOT wasteful, we still can't get rid of the deficit without either a) causing deliberate, severe inflation in order to "inflate away" the debt or b) raising taxes.
In fact, the likelihood is that it's going to take both.
Maybe the Bush tax cuts, but it could also be because so many more people don't have to pay taxes. But you do need to realize if you increase taxes 10% on the rich, you won't see a 10% increase in revenue. The rich will choose to invest more in projects that defer taxable income for decades like REIT's or tax free infrastructure bonds.
And I would be willing to pay more in taxes if I could get an actual spending freeze in Washington and locally, but it will never happen.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
This is exactly what President Obama stated, that 80% of Americans believe that the deficit CAN NOT be reduced with only spending cuts, that a combination of spending cuts and tax increases will be necessary. So Obama correct, Viking lied.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
I figured out where this rant about "lying Obama" came from... Too much bat-sh*t-crazy Limbaugh... I heard the clip where today's Martian-conspiracy is that the "bond rating companies" (i.e., Moody's) have been forced to stop doing illegal stuff by the Dodd-Frank Consumer Protection bill, so somehow that makes the rating companies "beholden" (I believe the term was: "know which side their bread is buttered on"), and somehow that means the Democrats have some mythical control over Moody's...So, if you carry the conspiracy out, it means that Moody's is "just sayin'" that the default will be catastrophic because of the Dodd-Frank "stop doing illegal sh*t" bill...
That's about as convoluted as it gets... But with Limbaugh, what else is new?
LadyJazzer wrote: I figured out where this rant about "lying Obama" came from... Too much bat-sh*t-crazy Limbaugh... I heard the clip where today's Martian-conspiracy is that the "bond rating companies" (i.e., Moody's) have been forced to stop doing illegal stuff by the Dodd-Frank Consumer Protection bill, so somehow that makes the rating companies "beholden" (I believe the term was: "know which side their bread is buttered on"), and somehow that means the Democrats have some mythical control over Moody's...So, if you carry the conspiracy out, it means that Moody's is "just sayin'" that the default will be catastrophic because of the Dodd-Frank "stop doing illegal sh*t" bill...
That's about as convoluted as it gets... But with Limbaugh, what else is new?
God, the sheep are stupid....
I haven't listened to Limbaugh in years. You grasp for straws again and pretend you know things that you don't.
AspenValley wrote: Anyone who thinks you can just "cut cut cut" the deficits away is dreaming.
Anyone who thinks you can get rid of the deficits without cut cut cut is simply delusional.
AspenValley wrote: A huge portion of the deficit is due to the Bush tax cuts, anyway you slice it. And when you add in the costs incurred by the two unnecessary wars Bush got us into it, it accounts for a huge portion of the remainder.
Tell me oh wise one, what is the dollar value of those cuts since they were enacted in 2003? I can promise you it is nowhere near $8 Trillion dollars. Try again, without the demagoguery this time.
AspenValley wrote: And yet you guys don't seem to have learned a very simple lesson.
You can't just slash taxes while at the same time pushing for expensive wars.
Wars have to paid for. What would you suggest instead of taxes to do that? A bake sale?
The Congressional appropriations for the war total something like $1.3 Trillion dollars for the last decade AV. We've spent that much money, and actually much more, in one year on social welfare in this nation. Not in a decade, in a year. Lopping off $140 Billion a year in spending on those wars will not have any noticeable effect on the runaway spending of this wannabe national government.
End the 3 wars, bring all the troops home and enact every one of Obummer's proposed penalties for succeeding and you still have an annual deficit north of $1 Trillion dollars a year. Your illiberal conclusions come out of partisanship, not reality as it exists. The only way out of this fiscal nightmare is to reduce the wannabe national government spending to a reasonable amount of the national production and keep it there. 25%, or more, of every dollar the nation produces is not a reasonable amount. 20% of every dollar is not reasonable either. 15% is at the top of what might be considered reasonable and 10% - 12%, the amount of national production that FDR was spending during the height of his alphabet soup New Deal period, is a lot closer to the maximum amount of national production that the federal government should be confiscating from the citizens of the states during normal years.
