Budget talks collapse, the GOP bails, blames democrats

[theeedude]

Republicans voted for this spending already when they passed the budget. Now they need to fund it.

 

[Double Trouble]

Government revenues are at their lowest share of the economy since 1950

Interesting, I did not know this.

and the US has the lowest tax burden of almost any industrialized country.

Not if you factor in all levels of taxes, fees (local, state, government, property taxes, sales taxes, registration fees and on). I'd guess if you factor all those in we're probably on par with most other western countries.

The problem is that unlike most western countries we maintain an insanely huge military complex and are actively engaged in major wars around the globe.

 

[Zorkorist]

Interesting, I did not know this.

He's being silly... last I heard Government had grown to where 24% of the American economy was related to Government.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Turn on your news channel tomorrow, and tell me how many news stories are about American Successes, and how many news stories are about this or that, Government regulation/program.

-John

 

[nonlnear]

He's being silly... last I heard Government had grown to where 24% of the American economy was related to Government.

-John

24%? I wish it were that low.

 

[Attic]

Government spending is not constrained by revenues

It is to a degree. Some would like to change the nature of the relationship we currently have between government spending and revenues.

, so saying new taxes would prompt more spending is silliness.

Once a tax dollar is taken from me I consider it spent. A lot of people who are taxed agree.

 

[MotF Bane]

If you get at the root of the issue, "blaming Republicans" is intellectually dishonest (but typical). The "negotiations" have been characterized as thus:

Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "This is pointless, see ya!"

That's not negotiating, by either party. Thus since both groups failed to make a good-faith effort the blame shall be laid at all their feet.

Afterwards, from the partisans:
*throw rocks*
*throw rock*

 

[HendrixFan]

He's being silly... last I heard Government had grown to where 24% of the American economy was related to Government.

-John

Deficits play a large part in funding it though. The problem is that "big government" isn't being paid for via taxation, it is being borrowed against.

Taxes as a percentage of GDP are near all time lows. Government spending is not however, and that is because we have such large annual deficits.

We certainly need cuts, but we also need more revenues. We don't just need enough to cover our overspending, we need enough to start working on paying down the existing debt.

 

[matt0611]

A balanced budget amendment would shackle the US government in a similar way as the gold standard did without any commensurate benefit. That's a pretty bad idea.

Shackling the government is the benefit.
Just one of the many reasons why we were better off on the gold standard and the main reason a balanced budget amendment would be great, then the beast could actually be starved.

 

[Zorkorist]

Deficits play a large part in funding it though. The problem is that "big government" isn't being paid for via taxation, it is being borrowed against.

Taxes as a percentage of GDP are near all time lows. Government spending is not however, and that is because we have such large annual deficits.

We certainly need cuts, but we also need more revenues. We don't just need enough to cover our overspending, we need enough to start working on paying down the existing debt.

I think I can speak for most of the people in America.

Cut Spending.

And then we can talk about other things.

-John

 

[umbrella39]

Let's extended the tax cuts to the gazillionaire "job creators" another 10 years! They have been doing such a fine job helping out that little pesky unemployment issue in the country why not keep it up.

You CAN'T cut taxes and start two wars and expect the economy to be fine.

Oh wait, too late...

 

[Zorkorist]

Do a Clinton, and go for a balanced budget.

Talk to me then.

-John

 

[Jhhnn]

If you get at the root of the issue, "blaming Republicans" is intellectually dishonest (but typical). The "negotiations" have been characterized as thus:

Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "Cut spending"
Democrats: "Increase taxes"
Republicans: "This is pointless, see ya!"

That's not negotiating, by either party. Thus since both groups failed to make a good-faith effort the blame shall be laid at all their feet.

Highly inaccurate It's more like this-

Republicans: "cut spending"
Democrats: "OK, but we need to raise revenues, too"
Republicans: "Cut taxes at the top some more" (Ryan budget)
Democrats: "But we need to increase revenues"
Republicans: "No we don't. We need more cuts so we can reduce taxes at the top. cut! cut! cut!"
Democrats: "Maybe we can cut the military"
Republicans: "NO!"
Democrats: "then we need to increase revenues"
Republicans: "Cut Elmo, cut SS. cut medicare. cut infrastructure. cut the IRS, SEC, CDC, and anything else we can, but not the military"

That's really the way it goes. Republicans really are trying to crash the economy, destroy the govt. The financial elite will emerge even stronger than before, because in the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king... and they'll make us all blind if they can.

 

[Zorkorist]

Let's extended the tax cuts to the gazillionaire "job creators" another 10 years! They have been doing such a fine job helping out that little pesky unemployment issue in the country why not keep it up.

You CAN'T cut taxes and start two wars and expect the economy to be fine.

Oh wait, too late...

You want to rape Gazillionares?

Funky 🙂

-John

 

[HendrixFan]

Do a Clinton, and go for a balanced budget.

Talk to me then.

-John

Clinton raised taxes first.

 

[umbrella39]

You want to rape Gazillionares?

Funky 🙂

-John

Hell for a Gazillion... one can rape me!

 

[Zorkorist]

Highly inaccurate It's more like this-

Republicans: "cut spending"
Democrats: "OK, but we need to raise revenues, too"
Republicans: "Cut taxes at the top some more" (Ryan budget)
Democrats: "But we need to increase revenues"
Republicans: "No we don't. We need more cuts so we can reduce taxes at the top. cut! cut! cut!"
Democrats: "Maybe we can cut the military"
Republicans: "NO!"
Democrats: "then we need to increase revenues"
Republicans: "Cut Elmo, cut SS. cut medicare. cut infrastructure. cut the IRS, SEC, CDC, and anything else we can, but not the military"

That's really the way it goes. Republicans really are trying to crash the economy, destroy the govt. The financial elite will emerge even stronger than before, because in the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king... and they'll make us all blind if they can.

Jhnn,

The economy is trashed. We owe countless dollars.

You can keep imagining that we can print pretty new dollars, but that doesn't help us.

What does help us, in an immediate sessation of Government spending, an immediate sessation of Government laws, and an immediate sessation of Government Regulation.

-John

 

[ProfJohn]

Government spending is not constrained by revenues, so saying new taxes would prompt more spending is silliness.

Government revenues are at their lowest share of the economy since 1950, and the US has the lowest tax burden of almost any industrialized country. Revenues now are well below their modern average. If you wish to reduce deficits, a return to a more normal revenue situation is only logical.

What is also logical is the fact that the drop in revenue is completely due to the recession and nothing else.

Bush's last tax cut took place in 2003! Look at the graph and notice that revenue as a percentage of GDP went UP after that tax cut!!!

Notice how the graph goes to hell post 2007? There were no tax cuts during those years!
In 2007 the year before the recession started tax revenue was 18.5% of GDP. Historically that is above the post WW 2 average.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205

The simple fact is that if you want to raise revenue then you should stop worrying about tax rates, which haven't changed in 8 years, and instead work at getting the economy fixed. Fix the economy and taxes revenue will come too.

 

[Zorkorist]

Clinton raised taxes first.

Somebody up above already explained that if Government raises taxes, they spend it.

-John

 

[ProfJohn]

He's being silly... last I heard Government had grown to where 24% of the American economy was related to Government.

-John

Wrong!! That 24% is just Federal Government land.
The state and local governments are another 20%.

So total government spending is nearly 50% of GDP.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Any rational person can see that our deficit cannot be closed by spending cuts alone, there will have to be tax increases. I personally cannot fathom that the Republicans are so ideologically crazed and so irresponsible as to actually hold to their no tax pledge.

I imagine they are just trying to strengthen their hand right now. It's already deeply irresponsible of them to play chicken with the debt ceiling like this, but I guess the great part about democracy is that we get exactly the government we deserve. Americans were dumb enough to elect these fools, so... yeah.

How about this. Make the close to 50% of income earners that pay no taxes or get more back than they pay in taxes, PAY TAXES!!!
Stop making other people pay more so others can not pay at all.
This is the problem. Liberals want to punish success and reward failure. At least that's what they want the simpleton mindless dolts that vote D all the time to think. When in reality, if they raise tax rates, there will just be more loopholes built into the system, as most Congress members are rich to begin with and they can right the code thus abuse it.

Fixing our current problem is very simple. STOP SPENDING MONEY!!!
If they won't stop spending money, put all the welfare bums to work building roads and bridges. We hear all this news about how our infrastructure is failing, but we don't have the money to fix it, then we hear about unemployment benefits getting extended.
Liberals don't care about the little guy, they care about duping the little guy into voting for them again. That is all.

 

[Zorkorist]

The solution is solely cutting spending, by the Government, which are not supposed to be anywhere in our lives.

-John

 

[theeedude]

What is also logical is the fact that the drop in revenue is completely due to the recession and nothing else.

Bush's last tax cut took place in 2003! Look at the graph and notice that revenue as a percentage of GDP went UP after that tax cut!!!

Notice how the graph goes to hell post 2007? There were no tax cuts during those years!
In 2007 the year before the recession started tax revenue was 18.5% of GDP. Historically that is above the post WW 2 average.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205

The simple fact is that if you want to raise revenue then you should stop worrying about tax rates, which haven't changed in 8 years, and instead work at getting the economy fixed. Fix the economy and taxes revenue will come too.

2007 tax revenue was driven by the housing bubble and the wealth effect. Soon as the housing bubble burst, that revenue was gone. So no, the revenue won't come back with these tax rates. Attempting to cut spending to be in line with the current depressed revenues is only going to crash the economy and those revenues further.

 

[fskimospy]

Shackling the government is the benefit.
Just one of the many reasons why we were better off on the gold standard and the main reason a balanced budget amendment would be great, then the beast could actually be starved.

Hahaha, oh really? Please explain to me why we were better off on the gold standard. (hint: there's a reason why every country on earth abandoned it)

 

[badb0y]

How about we do both. Cut spending and raise taxes back to the Clinton levels. And while we're at it we should get the fuck out of Iraq and Afghanistan since we got Osama bin Laden. Hey look badb0y for President WOOT!