I don't know how maintaining low taxes on the rich helps the debt
I certainly don't know how expanding the military helps the debt...well i guess it helps raise it but that's not what we are looking for
Raising taxes on the rich doesn't balance the budget either...
That Buffet Rule, as has been figured, would only generate $47B over the course of 10 years. That's less than $5B a year. How does that close a $1T deficit?
There simply aren’t enough millionaires to go around, either... Raising taxes on the top earners only taxes like 2K people of the 350M people in the country… They are the 1% for a reason…
Here is a good article which explains further;
Raising Taxes
That is an article by pro-tax revenue increase proponents... and they even know that raising the tax on the rich only wouldn't even make a dent...
Let's not act like the rich don't pay their fair share. Corporations pay 35% of their earnings. so for the "rich", the companies they start/manage already pay a huge tax before paying employees. Then The federal personal income tax is 35% (which as that article showed, and as it is well known, the top 10% of the earners in this country already pay 70% of the total income tax revenue collected)... then many states have additional income taxes ( in MA it's 5.3%). Then there are other taxes like a 15% Capital Gains Tax, an estate tax, a luxury tax, property tax, repatriation tax, tariffs, gas tax, alcohol tax, usury tax, etc.
The problem isn't that we aren't getting enough revenue. We’re getting about the same revenue as we have been in relation to GDP. Where we went amiss, is that over the last few administrations, we have been spending way too much...
At points during Obama's term we increased spending to emergency rates that had not been seen since WWII, when the entire nation was suddenly mobilized for a multination all out full scale conflict. Is that what really happened? They’ve hyped up "The Worst Economic Disaster Since The Great Depression" as if they were movie trailer voice over specialists, yet no one was out in soup lines, gas lines, etc. People weren’t digging up every piece of scrap metal for metal drives. The government didn't even spend at the rates the Obama administration has during the Great Depression itself!!!
Closer examination of the budget shows that during the greater majority of the Bush Administration we were spending $2.4-$2.5T. That went up slightly during the Bush Administration: his last submitted budget was $2.7T in spending. There was a deficit, but the revenue wasn't far behind at $2.5T. During the economic slowdown revenue initially dropped to $2T, but Obama increased Bush's last budget to $3.4T, which created a $1.4T deficit (revenue dropped by like $400B, but spending increased by $700B with an existing $300B deficit). Revenue has picked back up to $2.3T and is projected at $2.6T with the tax increase of the Bush Tax Cuts expiring. Yet, despite the lack of revenue, Obama has submitted budgets of $3.6T, $3.8T, $3.7T, and $3.8T, raising the spending levels an additional $700B from where it was when the $1.4T deficit was created. So if taxes catch up to $2.6T, in a best case scenario that leaves us with a $1.1T deficit...
Here's a graphic which shows the problem:
As you can see, the revenues on the green line have come back to about what they were, but the expenditures on the yellow line are still way over the amount of revenue collected. It’s historically been the problem. As a nation, we tend to keep spending beyond our means, and are cash strapped with persistent debt problems. We currently pay like $157B just in interest on the debt alone, increasing as the debt does…
We need to cut the amount of spending if we want to control the deficit and in turn the debt... we can't keep spending $1T more than we are taking in... Even a complete Bush Tax Cut expiration, raising tax rates on every American, most drastically on the working class who make $30K-$60K/yr who would have their taxes raised from 15% to 25%, would only increase revenues by $200-400B... leaving us with a $700-900B deficit...
Keep in mind, all of those estimates include current tax earners... it doesn't account for a loss in the size of the workforce, with the baby boomer retirement, or a massive amounts of layoffs from people whose businesses would have their taxes increased and have to lay off workers as a result... So we may not even collect that much in revenue, and might have to pay out so much more in expenditures for unemployment compensation...
Um, Harding ended up selling his newspaper for the equivalent of $14 million in today's dollars. I'd say that's being fairly successful, and obviously involved balancing many budgets. Likewise, Carter was a successful farmer who also had to balance budgets. It's either ridiculously dishonest or ignorant to describe Hoover as a simple engineer. He managed multiple companies, formed his own company and had investments all over the world. He amassed a fortune of about $100 million in today's dollars.
Again, you're mistaking managing a budget, with making money!!! None of those guys dealt with the budgets of those enterprises...
As I said Hoover was an engineer and a speculator. He had a nack for finding the right spots to purchase land and dig mines. That isn’t budget management. He was used to making enough money and someone else handling the budget. Carter, similarly, was an engineer in the US Navy, working on creating the nuclear submarine program. After leaving the military he took on a farm in his native state, but he was interested in the growing processes with the peanuts, not the management of the finances of that company. Harding’s paper was in debt a lot of its running. Harding made a lot of money off the final sale of his newspaper, but it was sold in the final year of his presidency, noticeably showing his lack of involvement in day to day operations. Therein lies the difference between owning and operating a company…
Compared to Romney all of their business experience combined is miniscule, as Romney managed the business operations of the enterprises he was managing. His business for a large part of his career was even based on budget management for other companies. He also did so quite successfully in his time in government.
I think the most telling sign of this thread is still that after both of those responses there was
still not a single mention of Obama...
