Repubs going on and on about the dire need to slash spending.

[Kaleva]

Had Fox on cable all this evening and that's what I've been hearing this entire time.

Not once did I hear someone say taxes must be raised.

How about getting rid the Bush tax break for the well off? Or eliminating the cap on the SS payroll tax?

[Cleita]

1. It's been all over even in some safe havens like

Free Speech TV. All I can say is that so far that policy hasn't worked at all, anytime in our history that it was tried, so why would it work the next time around? Those policies are what is fueling this depression we are experiencing and pandering to the RW's cut government and slash taxes meme is going to make things really bad.

[stockholmer]

2. unless you instutute a Tobin Tax, it is a spending problem, more than a revenue problem, here is why

Spending on empiric wars/black ops/national security and the US Federal debt service alone add up to at least $1.7 trillion a year in spending.

For just 2011, over $1.2 trillion will be spent on defense, black ops, previous military debt, etc. The overall deficit is $1.7+ trillion. $150 to 300 billion year in lost income tax revenue from the horrid Bush tax cuts {see below for the figures} is not going to come close to making serious dent in the deficit.

I completely agree with you that the wealthiest individuals should have not received extensions of the Bush tax cuts, but this is just a start. The US has to stop the empiric war spending and finally hold the financial systemic controllers to account.



Throughout the history of the last 65+ years, whatever the tax rates were for individuals and corporations have been, the most total revenue the Federal government has ever taken in is around 20% of the GDP. It fluctuates between 15% and 20% no matter what they do. Plus, the US GDP is now, as a percentage, composed to higher level of financial, banking transactions (not tangible good production, etc) than at any other time in its history.





What is needed is a 1% Tobin tax (a Wall Street sales tax, if you will) on all financial transactional turnover (with a $1 million bottom floor exemption on the first million dollars).

Combine that with at least a 50 to 60% reduction in war machine spending, and you have a balanced budget, the ability to start to pay down the national debt, and finally justice where the banksters are forced to pay their fair share of national upkeep. As of now they exist in an almost pure fascistic state, where they keep private 'profits' in the trillions, and yet get bailed out by having the trillions of real losses dumped onto the citizens.


This is a sample of the Bush income tax cuts

1998 - 828.6 in billions of constant dollars (1998 = 100)
1999 - 860.5
2000 - 950.9
2001 - 915.1 Bush tax cuts passed in June 2001
2002 - 777.7
2003 - 703.1
2004 - 698.1
2005 - 773.8
2006 - 844.0 5 years later tax revenue was still down from 2001

http://www.koch2congress.com/7.html

Taking the highest year (2001) and subtracting 2006 (844.0 5 years later tax revenue was still down from 2001) you come up with only a $106 billion difference. Taking the lowest year (2004) from the 2001 totals you get $252 billion. These numbers are dwarfed by the spending on the war machine alone.

Yes, taxing the rich via a fair income tax is important, but it doesn't come close to closing the huge deficits. Look at the percentage of GDP taken in tax when the top rate for the rich was 90% under Eisenhower. It didn't raise enough then, and certainly will not now. They will simply hide their income via loopholes, or move it off-shore. The only way to cut the deficits is to drastically cut war spending, close up many tax loopholes, institute a single-payer not-for-profit health care system, end the private Federal Reserve, and institute a Tobin tax of some sorts.

Good luck getting ANY of these done, no matter which of the two puppet parties are in power.

[hfojvt]

4. ha, thanks for the plug, but I strongly disagree with the conclusion

the gap is bigger than you measure it because of the growing GDP.

Sure 950.9 - 698.1 is only 252.8 billion in constant dollars whereas your $1.2 trillion is in nominal dollars some 13 years later. (1998 vs. 2011). But absent the Bush tax cuts, tax revenue would have grown with the GDP. Between 1998 and 2001 (taking 2000 out as an anomaly) the average growth rate in tax revenues was 3.47%. With 3% growth 2002 should have been 942 instead of 778, a gap of $164 billion, which then adds to the interest debt. While you call it "previous military debt" much of it is really previous TAX CUT debt.

Continuing on then, 2003 should have been 970 instead of 778, another gap of $192 billion, also adding to our interest expenses. 2004 should have been $999, and 2005 should have been $1029 and 2006 $1060.

Thus, the total loss for the years 2002 - 2006 was almost $1 trillion plus interest.

Unfortunately, that is all water under the damn, but it does show that our problem of the past came from tax cuts. Going forward, it is ridiculous when Republicans claim we have a spending problem and propose to cut spending over the next ten years by $4 trillion to solve the deficit problem while at the same time they propose to keep the Bush tax cuts at a ten year cost of $4 trillion, and many Republicans propose even more tax cuts and more spending cuts. All based on the ridiculous notion that "we have a spending problem".

Which is not to say that we do not need to cut spending on wars and weapons and 'defense' but that's not where most politicians and pundits are looking when they say "we have a spending problem".

[stockholmer]

5. I see what you are saying but 'total loss for the years 2002 - 2006 was almost $1 trillion"

doesn't come close to close to closing the deficit in meaningful way. In other words, let's say that we take that 5 year figure of $1 trillion, divide it up annually ($200 billion per year) and then ADD it the largest possible loss in my post ($250 Billion). This brings it to $450 billion per year. That still pales compared to $1.7 Trillion deficit for JUST ONE YEAR.

Also, when you factor in TRUE inflation (not the bullshit, hedonically twisted Fed core rate that pretty much ingnores energy and commodities cost rises), the US GDP is actually shrinking.

Furthermore, when the yields on short term and long term US treasuries start to rise (which they will be forced to by the bond market), you are staring down the barrel of another $200 Billion (low-end) to perhaps $1 Trillion PER YEAR in debt service service payment.

The empire is bust, and short of a Tobin Tax, there is no crawling out of the hole. The 2 main scenarios are to debase the currency to support the debt by printing ad infinitum (which WILL lead to a hyper-inflationary collapse and massive civil unrest), or a default on the debt, which will cause a massive systemic deflationary spiral globally.

Plus, do not forget that there are 6 to 7 trillion in further debts bing kept off-balance sheet just from Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac. Plus the toxic paper derivatives held by the Fed, parked in off-shore holding pens such Maiden Lane I, II, and III. Not to mention the unfunded liabilities of Social Security, and the bigger Medicare.

WW3 is the third main possibility, pick your poison. This all will play out in the next 2-3 years (short guess) to 7-9 years max.

The world burns, the wars rage, the oil supply has peaked, the environment is so degraded, the bankers loot trillions, and the masses suffer as the global monetary system breaks down. This is compressing real tangible wealth and power upward in a ever-narrowing distribution pyramid accrued by the few neo-Pharaohs at the top.

And, in case you don't like this, there is a track/trace/database control grid backed up by police/SWAT goon squads (many of whom are unstable from fresh empiric war battle theatre exposure) just itching to teach us 'slaves' a lesson.

Sorry for the nihilism, it is just what I seen coming.

[Warpy]

3. All I have to say to them is that the only place left to cut is the Pentagon

If Democrats would start doing that, loudly and publicly, then they'd get really quiet all of a sudden.

[aquart]

6. It fills me with a dire need to slash something, too.

But I promised my mother I would never go to jail for murder.