Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

If only we had just "maintained" spending levels. We cut taxes while raising spending. Not sure how you can say that the tax piece is the only problem.

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Estimated by who? We would have had a huge surplus the year that the economy tanked? Huh? I assume that this "surplus" includes the S.S. surplus. More voodoo.

Originally Posted by Real World

Cuz there was never any surplus.

Originally Posted by BostonPatriot71

Even if we do nothing and just let it happen (which I still favor), we still have a deficit, we still spend money we don't have.

When you continuously spend money you don't have you generate what I call 'artificial wealth'. I will try to explain what I mean with this example: I buy an expensive house and an expensive car. People can see these things and think I'm probably doing well. What they don't see is the mountain of debt I generated behind it. And as long as I can somehow kick the can down the road and make the payments, people will think I have more wealth than I actually do.
That's what I call artificial wealth. It isn't sustainable. And running up more debt to charge payments to my kids or even to my grandchildren, that would be a sociopathic thing to do. Some people apparently think that spending NOW NOW NOW for which our kids and grandkids will have to pay it back at some point in the future after our generation is all dead and gone. That's selfish. We need to realize we have lived too large and cannot afford all the goodies we have.

What we need to figure out is how to phase out the artificial wealth, the deficits and bring down the debt without it unduly burdening those who cannot afford to lose anything. Tax the rich? Let's start with taxing corporations where they actually earn the money rather than on which tax haven they happen to be incorporated. Let's see if these Hollywood celebrities are still so 'progressive' if we tax their holdings according to how we tax ordinary people. Because I'll tell ya this, most of Hollyweird got most of their money in tax shelters too, just like the corporations.

Gut the defense budget, close all overseas military bases. That would be a nice beginning. End corporate handouts. And after you do all that you might consider looking at some of these unaffordable public sector union contracts. But not before.

Originally Posted by JackBauer

I'm not sure, either, considering I've never said that.



Estimated by the CBO. And yes, it's a cumulative surplus from 2001-global financial crisis. Illustrating, once again, that most of our fiscal imbalance can be traced directly to the Bush tax cuts, the wars, and Medicare Part D.

Originally Posted by Real World

More math:


The math clearly shows that the spending side is where the problem rests. As I posted earlier in here, federal spending is up 224% since 1998. Yes, I said 224%. The federal government spent $1.7 Trillion in 1998, and $3.8 Trillion in 2012. Those figures alone are insane, but it gets worse.

The government has spent over $3 trillion in the last 4 straight years. That number alone is staggering, but the real kick to the nuts is the fact that the highest ever annual revenue total for the federal government is $2.57 trillion. That was in 2007. So while the government has spent over $3 trillion in 4 straight years, with only higher numbers in sight, it's NEVER in it's existence, come close to taking in $3 trillion. Matter of fact, the government has spent more than it's record level revenue of $2.57 Trillion, in each of the last 7 years.

We have a spending problem people.

Originally Posted by Real World

More math:


The math clearly shows that the spending side is where the problem rests. As I posted earlier in here, federal spending is up 224% since 1998. Yes, I said 224%. The federal government spent $1.7 Trillion in 1998, and $3.8 Trillion in 2012. Those figures alone are insane, but it gets worse.

The government has spent over $3 trillion for the last 4 straight years. That number alone is staggering, but the real kick to the nuts is the fact that the highest ever annual revenue total for the federal government is $2.57 trillion. That was in 2007, after an artifical bubble economy. So while the government has spent over $3 trillion for 4 straight years, with only higher numbers in sight, it's NEVER in it's existence, come close to taking in $3 trillion. Matter of fact, the government has spent more than it's record level revenue of $2.57 Trillion, in each of the last 7 years.

We have a spending problem people, and a very serious one at that.

Originally Posted by JackBauer

What you've just argued could just as easily be presented as a revenue problem.

Originally Posted by DarrylS

963 Generals/admirals each with their accompanying 1 million dollar entourage...

243 Golf Courses all of which need to be maintained..

700 Bases around the world, including; 287 in Germany, 89 in Italy, 130 In Japan, 106 in South Korea.. all of which need to be supplied and maintained.

500 Million annually for Military Bands..

52% of all returning Irag/Afghanistan vets are applying for permanent disability..

And no one can even begin to discuss, "legacy costs" of the military.....

And we talk about cutting benefits to seniors who are probably not going to be able to find work to make up the difference..

Our priorities are completely f...ed up... Military madness has ruined our country..