I have made no such argument. In fact I have repeatedly state that our revenue must increase despite what the Repubs think. I have also repeatedly stated that our spending must be decreased. This is very simple math.Speaking of ignorant views you've just spewed a whole slew of them into this debate.... it's a shame really.
This is the thing. You seem to be using the argument that since repealing the tax cuts on the people who are making over $250k is too small a start that it's not even worth beginning.
That is such bullshit.
Absolutely. The point I was making is that it will be insignificant in the scheme of things. Does that mean it isn't a good start, not at all, but it just isn't significant.We have to start somewhere and starting with the people who would be "hurt" much less, by returning their tax rates to the responsible 39.5% enacted during the 90s, is worth doing because reducing the rate at which the National Debt is increasing is of paramount importance to the U.S.A.
Especially if you can do it while increasing the tax rates on the people who would be harmed the least by such increases.
Besides, the original argument was how the Bush tax cuts are the main driver of the deficit going forward. I simply pointed out, very factually, that neither side is willing to get rid of the vast majority of those tax cuts so blaming it on anyone but our current crop of politicians going forward is disingenuous at best.
Agreed.PS I would really love to have seen the Bush Tax cuts not happen at all when we've started to engage in 2 conflicts/wars overseas but there goes that.
Does math hurt your head or something?Yes only repealing the Bush tax cuts on the top 4% is a small start. However, we must start somewhere. A start is better than "crying oh but it's such a small start why even start at all."
You might want to make sure someone actually argued that before throwing the "idiotic" term around lest you end up looking like one yourself....When you argue that it's "too small a start" it's so fucking idiotic that it's beyond words...
Yet you have found a way to convince yourself that it's a valid argument.
Sure thing. Now what about the other 96ish% of the deficit?As I recall starting with only incomes above only $250k is only looking at the people who are in the top 4 or 5% so it really brings up another question of how valid this target income is in terms of the level at which we should repeal the Bush Tax cuts.
We should definitely end them for the people earning $250k.
As the economy is recovering (albeit very slowly) we should eventually (after the recovery is strong enough) look at incomes between $100k and $250k for a partial or full repeal of the Bush tax rates next.