No, it is not obviously untrue. A budget deficit is the difference between income (receipts) and expenditures. You can widen the deficit by reducing income or increasing expenditures or any combination thereof. You can lower deficits by doing the opposite.
Deficit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Your statement that cutting taxes does not increase the deficit is arguable; it is very, very far from axiomatic, which you imply. While its ok to hold the position that reducing taxes does not affect the deficit, you have to recognize that it is only a position. Given, that the statement is contrary to logic (reducing taxes acts first to reduce receipts and therefore widen the deficit) the burden of proof is on you to support that statement.
What is insincere and ignorant is thinking you can just make such a broad statement, pound your chest and think you have the truth. You are trumpeting a belief system that is in the minority and frankly illogical, its really up to you to support your claim. Good luck, however, as there is very little to no evidence supporting this assertion.
Please honor the intelligence of other people on this forum and step up your game with intelligent comments and evidence supporting your statements. You can help yourself here by presenting the work of an established economist. If you can not do this then stick to posting things you know something about.
We both know it would not be a big help, but I'm sure it felt good to get that off your ideological chest :2razz:[...] What might be a big help is if the Feds stopped suing people like Boeing for Creating Jobs or shutting down Gibson Guitars for creating jobs or running oil rigs out of the Gulf on a whim or similar anti business moves.
A cheaper widget is not necessarily a better widget. In fact, it can be worse.That's an uninspired view. The best way to lose a fight is to give up.
The productivity in business is not measured in widgets per hour, but in widgets per dollar. We don't need to decrease what we pay workers if we can figure out how to make our workers' work count for more.
In the case of the auto industry a few decades ago, the American engineers were designing a shoddy product (to save money) while the Japanese engineers designed a quality product (at a slightly higher cost). The rest is history. Wages were not an issue.In the case of the auto industry, we were once able to out automate the competition. Now the competition is as automated as we are. Only at this point do we ask, "If their guys are doing exactly the same hi-tech work as our guys and doing it, but at half the wage rate, are we overpaying?"
True, but even Jobs succumbed to the capitalist disease (as if he hadn't a long time ago, screwing Wozniak -- the brains of the operation -- here and there), recently bragging how Chinese indentured servant assembly line workers can be woken up in the middle of the night to effect last minute engineering changes.The better way to compete is the way Apple does. Better products and better ideas.
Do you live in that conservative universe where increasing income is a mathematical impossibility?[....] Whether it is as a nation or as an individual, the way to reduce debt is to reduce spending to less than income and pay off the debt with the excess. Loaves and fishes have nothing to do with it.
Says who, and compared to what?Spending cuts need to be the largest factor, we are spending far too much and it isn't sustainable. [...]
I would support the Tea Party a lot more if they pushed for a constitutional amendment for replacing the income tax with a national retail sales tax and giving the POTUS the line item veto as opposed to their drive for a balanced budget amendment.
What do you think are the best ways to eliminate the deficit?
Spending cuts need to be the largest factor, we are spending far too much and it isn't sustainable. Tax increases would be foolish in my opinion. I would support eliminating some tax loopholes, but not increasing taxes on anyone (especially during an economic downturn). First and foremost though, there needs to be drastic spending cuts.
Spending cuts need to be the largest factor, we are spending far too much and it isn't sustainable. Tax increases would be foolish in my opinion. I would support eliminating some tax loopholes, but not increasing taxes on anyone (especially during an economic downturn). First and foremost though, there needs to be drastic spending cuts.
I agree that tax increases on the low- and middle-income would be disastrous, but why do you think raising taxes on people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year or more would be foolish?
The people who can afford to pay more taxes should pay more taxes than they are now in my opinion.
The worst thing you could do to our consumer economy is to tax spending. We need to tax income NOT spent if we are to grow the economy and not shrink GDP by taking away money that people would otherwise spend. The more progressive the tax structure is the faster our economy can grow.
The worst thing you could do to our consumer economy is to tax spending.
The more progressive the tax structure is the faster our economy can grow.
We both know it would not be a big help, but I'm sure it felt good to get that off your ideological chest :2razz:
A cheaper widget is not necessarily a better widget. In fact, it can be worse.
In the case of the auto industry a few decades ago, the American engineers were designing a shoddy product (to save money) while the Japanese engineers designed a quality product (at a slightly higher cost). The rest is history. Wages were not an issue.
True, but even Jobs succumbed to the capitalist disease (as if he hadn't a long time ago, screwing Wozniak -- the brains of the operation -- here and there), recently bragging how Chinese indentured servant assembly line workers can be woken up in the middle of the night to effect last minute engineering changes.
Do you live in that conservative universe where increasing income is a mathematical impossibility?
Says who, and compared to what?
The worst thing you could do to our consumer economy is to tax spending. We need to tax income NOT spent if we are to grow the economy and not shrink GDP by taking away money that people would otherwise spend. The more progressive the tax structure is the faster our economy can grow.
Why would raising taxes on the top brackets effect spending or growth even in a downturn? The wealthy spend all they want regardless of tax rates. The more we tax them the more they make anyway.
I agree that tax increases on the low- and middle-income would be disastrous, but why do you think raising taxes on people making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year or more would be foolish? They've had these tax rates for a decade and guess what, the "job creation" from these wealthy "job creators" hasn't materialized. Even before the recession, the economy under the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy was not booming.
To me, cutting spending and raising taxes on the wealthy go hand-in-hand for deficit reduction. Why do you think Bill Clinton's presidency ended in huge budget surpluses? The people who can afford to pay more taxes should pay more taxes than they are now in my opinion.
You left something off: Tax newly legalized services. Sexual freedom should be legalized, meaning if someone wants to pay for sexual services, he should be able to. That should be regulated and taxed. If someone wants to consume marijuana or Psilocybin mushrooms for medicinal or recreational use, he should be allowed to. Again, regulate and tax it.
I would also put a 99% tax on all corporate bribery -- I mean donations -- of political campaigns. Of course, they might just quit donating if the tax were that high. FINE WITH ME!
There should be cuts, but not of Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, or education. We should END the war on drugs that would save money on wasted enforcement. Also give amnesty to people convicted of non-violent drug offenses and let them out of prison -- less money spend on prisons. Withdraw all troops from Afghanistan immediately -- more money saved.
You left something off: Tax newly legalized services. Sexual freedom should be legalized, meaning if someone wants to pay for sexual services, he should be able to. That should be regulated and taxed. If someone wants to consume marijuana or Psilocybin mushrooms for medicinal or recreational use, he should be allowed to. Again, regulate and tax it.
I would also put a 99% tax on all corporate bribery -- I mean donations -- of political campaigns. Of course, they might just quit donating if the tax were that high. FINE WITH ME!
There should be cuts, but not of Social Security, Medicare, food stamps, or education. We should END the war on drugs that would save money on wasted enforcement. Also give amnesty to people convicted of non-violent drug offenses and let them out of prison -- less money spend on prisons. Withdraw all troops from Afghanistan immediately -- more money saved.
Eliminate 3/4 of the earth's human population with treatment resistant tuberculosis and small pox, put the survivors to work in the rebuilding process, continue building our military strength, and use that to coerce weaker nations.What do you think are the best ways to eliminate the deficit?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?