Well, thanks for proving my point. Your tax receipt numbers were way off. From your site, which I also use a lot, that's why I was questioning your receipts by year by the way. Guess you just can't learn a lot.
U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis
Federal Tax Receipts by year:
2000 - $2.085 Billion
2001 - $2.048 Billion
2002 - $1.885 Billion
2003 - $1.907 Billion
2004 - $2.039 Billion
2005 - $2.315 Billion
2006 - $2.552 Billion
2007 - $2.681 Billion
2008 - $2.531 Billion
2009 - $2.227 Billion
These numbers are nowhere near where you had posted previously. And less than is expected for 2011 by the way ($2.589 Billion).
There is no historical evidence that reduced taxes increases net revenues from tax receipts. Even a conservative foundation admits this:
The Tax Foundation - Five Myths about the Bush Tax Cuts
We also have to pay interest on our current debt, so you need to add another $250 Billion or so.
So, you think Social Security, Medicaire and Medicaid should not be government programs? If so, fine, but the states will have to fund them then so federal taxes will go down but state taxes will go up, a lot if they are to be funded properly.
That's fine, but as I proved above you are using the wrong numbers.
What are you trying to point out here? I've said above that Medicaid outlays by the federal government are not being properly funded. So, I guess we agree.
Again, you are reiterating my points from previous posts. The Federal government does pay into Medicaid programs, but does not have the related revenue from tax receipts to fund those payments.