Under Clinton we had the dot.com bubble that increased employment. There weren't 25 million unemployed or under employed Americans during the Clinton years nor the Bush years.
I have never claimed that taxes should be raised, only that those who believe we have a revenue problem are looking in the wrong places to get their revenue and ignore the impact that increase in taxes will have.
What I am saying is we need to cut spending, not increase taxes. You seem to believe we need to pay for a 3.7 trillion dollar govt. I am saying we need to cut that size of govt.
You have yet to answer the question about the 3.7 trillion dollar govt. or I haven't seen it. Why do we need a 3.7 trillion dollar govt paying for these expenses when many of them are duplicated by the states.
Gen. Science, Space
By the way, do you notice anything on the list of expenses that shouldn't be in the general budget of the U.S?
The notion that there is some glut of business demand being drown out by regulation is nonsense. Maybe this crowd can put together a valid case of the most labor intensive production and services feeling a pinch from regulation (the largest would be the minimum wage), but this is only a positive reaction in both the short and long term.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911