majority of Americans want Obama's deficit reduction plan

The rich account for 20% of the income and 40% of the income taxes - a 2:1 ratio. Isn't a tax burden that is 100% higher than the percentage their income represents "fair" enough for you? Obviously not. What should the ration be LJ? 300%? 500%? How much authority should the DC government have to determine how much of the fruits of one's labor they "don't need"? What is a reasonable percentage of the national production for the DC government to consume year after year? 25%? 33%? 50%? More?

The reason the people will eventually turn on the Democrats is that they have no answers to these fundamental questions LJ. The Republicans have already answered them.

Since you apparently have a problem with reading comprehension as well as being bat-sh*t-crazy, I'll repeat it:

The millionaires and billionaires are generally paying a lower effective tax rate than their secretaries. But if you keep repeating it often enough you might actually believe it someday...

Insert standard phrase-of-the-day re: "FDR" and the "coup" here: ______________________________________

"wannabe national government" here: _________________________

And since you have evidenced an even greater inability to comprehend, I'll repeat myself as well.

The tax revenues submitted to the federal government are within the historical post WWII norms, it is the federal spending that is excessive beyond any level of reason at this point, not the tax revenues received by the federal government every year. The citizens of the states have, even during one of the worst economic downturns ever recorded, submitted to the federal government a predictable and stable supply of tax revenues. That is not the problem the nation faces. The problem the nation faces is a DC government that wants to spend significantly more than the tax potential each and every year. The solution to the problem is for the DC government to reduce its spending to at least match, not exceed, the tax potential. Regardless of effective tax rates, regardless of economic condition, the tax receipts of the federal government have remained a fairly consistent percentage of national production. Changing the tax rates won't alter that reality. Regardless of tax rates, number of years someone is allowed to depreciate their purchase of a jet or the amount of income subject to the privilege to be employed/have employee taxes, the DC government will be collecting between 17% and 18% of the annual national production in taxes. That amount of revenue will never support a budget bottomed on the DC government spending 25% of the national production on an annual basis. Comprende?

We've already proved that tax-cuts don't create jobs.... So, as usual, every time you repeat the same crap, I call B.S.

Do you mean this tax-rate ratio:

Tax rate as percent of GDP lowest in several decades
Posted on July 14, 2011

Tax rate as percentage of GDP

2006… 7.9
2007….8.4
2008…8.0
2009… 6.5
2010…. 6.2

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts ... ?Docid=205

That kind of makes you a liar....again....

As Dog stated so succinctly:

This bears repeating....

Something the Dog Said wrote: As has been repeatedly discussed ad nausem, the limits are that the powers be in the general welfare of the individuals, and to those powers that are necessary and proper for the federal government to execute its duties. This has been established over 200 years and no one, but no one, dispute that other than you and a few deranged individuals. You can continue with your Printsmith Revisionist History Channel, or travel back in time, but neither is going to change the role of the federal government.

We don't much give a sh*t if you don't agree.

PrintSmith wrote:

Something the Dog Said wrote: So the CBO just released the economic analysis of the Boehner plan, and it reduces the deficit at best by $1 billion per year. So much for the $1 trillion cut in spending.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011 ... t-year.php

What else would you expect from a compromise with Democrats, actual savings instead of smoke and mirrors?

That plan was not a compromise, it was an attempt by Republican leadership to ram it through. The Democrat plan is the only one that will substantially reduce the deficit, by deep spending cuts combined with closing of special interest tax loopholes. The Republicans are too busy trying to protect their corporate and ultra-wealthy owners to come up with something that will actually reduce the deficit. If you would get off your demagoguery and actually study the plans you would see the Democrats are the only ones who will substantially reduce the deficit.

PrintSmith wrote: The rich account for 20% of the income and 40% of the income taxes - a 2:1 ratio. Isn't a tax burden that is 100% higher than the percentage their income represents "fair" enough for you? Obviously not. What should the ration be LJ? 300%? 500%? How much authority should the DC government have to determine how much of the fruits of one's labor they "don't need"? What is a reasonable percentage of the national production for the DC government to consume year after year? 25%? 33%? 50%? More?

The reason the people will eventually turn on the Democrats is that they have no answers to these fundamental questions LJ. The Republicans have already answered them.

That is absolutely one hundred percent a lie. The rich account for 20% of the income and pay 20% of the taxes, a 1:1 ratio. You keep repeating your lies but it has been proven over and over that it is absolutely a lie.

According the Christian Science Monitor:

To put it in numbers, according to the analysis, the top 1 percent of earners account for 20.3 percent of total personal income in the United States and pay 21.5 percent of all federal and state taxes. The middle 20 percent of households earn 11.6 percent of US income and pay 10.3 percent of taxes. The lowest 20 percent account for just 3.5 percent of income, and pay 2 percent of all taxes.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0415/ ... ey-pay-now

Either you are just sadly ignorant about the facts, or deliberately lying about them, but this has been pointed out to you before.

archer wrote: Nice spin...but you are blaming the wrong party and the American people know it. 2012 may be the Republicans wake up call....this country is better than what Republicans are trying to turn her into.

Still no answer. Just rhetoric about wake up calls and elections. And how are the Republicans trying to turn America into anything? The Dems are in control of 2 out of the 3 houses. And everything America has turned into the last 2 years has been ALL Dems in control. When all else fails, scream the Republican's did it and run!

Something the Dog Said wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: The rich account for 20% of the income and 40% of the income taxes - a 2:1 ratio. Isn't a tax burden that is 100% higher than the percentage their income represents "fair" enough for you? Obviously not. What should the ration be LJ? 300%? 500%? How much authority should the DC government have to determine how much of the fruits of one's labor they "don't need"? What is a reasonable percentage of the national production for the DC government to consume year after year? 25%? 33%? 50%? More?

The reason the people will eventually turn on the Democrats is that they have no answers to these fundamental questions LJ. The Republicans have already answered them.

That is absolutely one hundred percent a lie. The rich account for 20% of the income and pay 20% of the taxes, a 1:1 ratio. You keep repeating your lies but it has been proven over and over that it is absolutely a lie.

According the Christian Science Monitor:

To put it in numbers, according to the analysis, the top 1 percent of earners account for 20.3 percent of total personal income in the United States and pay 21.5 percent of all federal and state taxes. The middle 20 percent of households earn 11.6 percent of US income and pay 10.3 percent of taxes. The lowest 20 percent account for just 3.5 percent of income, and pay 2 percent of all taxes.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0415/ ... ey-pay-now

Either you are just sadly ignorant about the facts, or deliberately lying about them, but this has been pointed out to you before.

Just want to point out that you are talking about apples and oranges. PS was talking about federal income tax as was LJ in her post before that.

Now you are talking about something different which is total taxes paid for just about everything (includes sales tax, payroll tax, property tax, and more). And you say "according to the Christian Science Monitor". They didn't produce that data, they just quoted a liberal tax advocacy group, "Citizens for Tax Justice". And that group didn't create the data either, they reference another organizaion. I tried searching them for the data too, but to no avail. It would be a very complicated calculation to figure out, and it could be skewed.

So you've changed the arguement, while calling PS a liar, but not going after LJ too. But it is you who changed it. Seems unfair to me.

Someone just pointed out the absolute answer to our economy problem! All we have to do is unemploy 4 people, Obama, Biden, Pelosi, and Reid, and our economy will start to employ hundreds of thousands again! So simple!

I'll type slower LJ, maybe you'll catch the drift this time around. Regardless of tax rates, the citizens have submitted an average of 17% of the national annual GDP to the federal government in taxes. When the privilege to be employed/have employee taxes were half what they were now on half of the income they are now the federal government still received about the same percentage of annual production in taxes as it does today. When the top marginal rate was 70% of the next dollar earned, the federal government still only took in about 17% of the annual national production in taxes. When the capital gains taxes were structured under Reagan so that there was essentially no difference between taxing income and taxing capital gains for the upper income earners, the federal government received about 17% of the annual production of the nation in tax receipts that year. The tax potential for the federal government is going to be 17% of GDP regardless of whether the tax rates are higher than ever or lower than ever, that is what has remained consistent for the last 70 years regardless of what tax rates are, what tax deductions exist, what percentage of citizens do or do not pay income taxes. The federal government's consistent share of the national pie is going to remain at about 17% of GDP just as it has for the last 70+ years.

A federal budget that consistently calls for 24% of the annual national production is forever going to be about 7% of GDP more than they realize in tax revenues because that number isn't going to change regardless of what the tax policy is. It might go up to 20% for a year or fall to 16% for a couple of years in a row, but over the course of time, say the next decade, the federal government can count on taking in 17% of the annual national GDP in tax dollars. That's all there is, there ain't going to be any more. The nation isn't going to all of a sudden start generating 25% of annual GDP in tax revenue from here on out simply because Obama wants to spend that much every year. Over the next 10 years the federal government will average 17% of the national GDP in tax receipts, just as it has for the last 10 years, the 10 years before that, the 10 years before that, the 10 years before that and the 30 years before that. 17% over time is as big as the slice is going to get. If we continue to spend 25%, that additional 8% will continue to dig the debt hole deeper and deeper every year until the sides of the hole collapse and buries the nation alive.

The problem is spending, not revenue. The problem will only be fixed by reducing the spending because tax increases are not going to result in an additional 8% of GDP in tax revenues. Why is this so difficult to grasp if one bothers to look at the revenue history for the last 75 years? It's been a pretty flat line for all 75+ years as the tax policies have shifted and changed. The only way to increase the revenue taken in by the federal government is to grow the economy so that the constant 17% of GDP results in a lot more dollars.

Obama's 2021 projected federal budget is in excess of $5 Trillion dollars. In order for there to be even a sliver of hope that there will be no deficit, the GDP of the nation will have to more than double in the next decade to something approaching $29.5 Trillion annually. For the last decade, the rate of economic growth was under 2% per year, putting us on a track for a GDP of not $29.5 Trillion, but $17 Trillion. Obama's projected $5 Trillion budget would then be over 29% of the annual GDP, even more obscene than the current 25% is. The problem isn't revenue, it is going to stay the same at a little over 17% of GDP regardless of what DC does to tax rates. The problem is spending, which has to fall from its current 25% to the same 17% as revenue to stop the growth of the public debt. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem.