• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How to balance the budget in 3 steps

I think the top tier will have to be a little higher than the Obama era. Clinton/Gore balanced the budget with an Obama-like 40% top tier. Because we now have to pay so much more in interest on the debt, the top tier will have to be about 50%. Once balanced, it could return to 40%.

The problem with this is tax rates do not mean anything when the IRS has 70,000 pages of deductions and loopholes. For example

For 2015, the President filed jointly with the First Lady, Michelle Obama, and reported adjusted gross income of $436,065 for 2015 — down about 8% from last year — and paid $81,472 in federal taxes. That makes his effective tax rate is 18.7%, according to tax releases from the White House.

Obama and Michelle were in the 40% tax rate, based on the Obama tax rate schedule, yet he paid only 18.7% in taxes. The problem with tax rates is they are misleading; scam. Only the poor people pay the full percent. Obama was paying the same tax rate as someone who made $40,000, but fake news and Democrats will call it 40%. In the the end, the poor and middle class pay more, due to fewer loopholes and deductions.

The reason the Democrats like tax rates is because they know that leaving open the loopholes and deduction is how you get campaign donations from the rich and mega rich. The 70,000 pages of IRS loopholes is a whose who of campaign donation scams, that is so entangled, it is always easy to add more and more pages for new donations.

If Obama had been in an honest 20% tax bracket, with no loopholes, we could increase tax revenues. It would look like we did him a favor by decreasing his rate from 40% to 20%. An honest number is never pledged by the Democrats. The Democrats will promote a 90% rate for the rich. Then they will approach the same people with loopholes, so their effective rate is 20%, if they pay a donation. The little guy cannot offer this, so he pays more, killing the middle class.

What I would do, is look at the effective rates of the Fortune 500 companies and top 500 rich people, after all donations and loopholes. Then we add 1 percent to create an honest rate, across the board, with no loopholes. Then we burn the 70,000 pages of donation scams. The swamp will be drained due to transparency and no smoky backrooms of legal complexity to run deals.
 
Military bases: The USA has 10,000 bases in 155+ Nations. These are to enforce hegemony and protect USA/Corporate "interests" and investments or control resources. Kissinger stated that the USA has "interests," not friends. WE are not in these Nations to help people, but to protect interests. We kill a lot of poeple to protect "interests." A 75% cut in all Military related spending might be a good place to start. Put the unemployed military into Renewable Energy as a 100% National policy. Since the Military connected spending is about 30% of the USA WAR economy, there will be some pain and a committment to new domestic infrastructure at a LOCAL, not CORPORATE level would be required. The Military budget subsidizes Big Corporate a/k/a Corporate Welfare and that is the welfare to cut. Get rid of the Corporate Welfare Queens. Mitigation of Global Warming presents opportunities for myriad jobs. Windmills, solar panels, electric vehicles, storage batteries, small farms, localized utilities representing decentralized distribution of Energies, rural retirement communities developed around water resources or entertainment facilities, legalized gambling on a local scale (not Casino scale), Amish style communities where the pool of local money travels in local circles instead of "out of the Community," and other ideas outside my range of vision or expetise. The object being to create an economic engine to replace the Miitary OFFENSE and attendant killing worldwide. I know the MSM agenda portrays us as defenders of the weak and the poor and the powerless, but it is a MSM fable. Keep in mind, we have "interests," not friends, ergo we are probably not friendly. The proof is in the dead bodies created by our Militant policies. This all relates to about 30% of our National budget and pertains precisely to the OP. Realistic appraisal and alternatives, not a rant.
/
 
The problem with this is tax rates do not mean anything when the IRS has 70,000 pages of deductions and loopholes. For example



Obama and Michelle were in the 40% tax rate, based on the Obama tax rate schedule, yet he paid only 18.7% in taxes. The problem with tax rates is they are misleading; scam. Only the poor people pay the full percent. Obama was paying the same tax rate as someone who made $40,000, but fake news and Democrats will call it 40%. In the the end, the poor and middle class pay more, due to fewer loopholes and deductions.

The reason the Democrats like tax rates is because they know that leaving open the loopholes and deduction is how you get campaign donations from the rich and mega rich. The 70,000 pages of IRS loopholes is a whose who of campaign donation scams, that is so entangled, it is always easy to add more and more pages for new donations.

If Obama had been in an honest 20% tax bracket, with no loopholes, we could increase tax revenues. It would look like we did him a favor by decreasing his rate from 40% to 20%. An honest number is never pledged by the Democrats. The Democrats will promote a 90% rate for the rich. Then they will approach the same people with loopholes, so their effective rate is 20%, if they pay a donation. The little guy cannot offer this, so he pays more, killing the middle class.

What I would do, is look at the effective rates of the Fortune 500 companies and top 500 rich people, after all donations and loopholes. Then we add 1 percent to create an honest rate, across the board, with no loopholes. Then we burn the 70,000 pages of donation scams. The swamp will be drained due to transparency and no smoky backrooms of legal complexity to run deals.

Not really a problem. Look at the history of upper tier tax hikes. In every case, the EFFECTIVE TAX RATE followed it upward. Clinton and Gore built a budget surplus with a combination of spending cuts (Bipartisan effort with a Repub Congress) and increasing the upper tier tax rate to over 40%. The EFFECTIVE TAX RATE followed it upward.
 
Not really a problem. Look at the history of upper tier tax hikes. In every case, the EFFECTIVE TAX RATE followed it upward. Clinton and Gore built a budget surplus with a combination of spending cuts (Bipartisan effort with a Repub Congress) and increasing the upper tier tax rate to over 40%. The EFFECTIVE TAX RATE followed it upward.

Clinton and Gore had a GOP Congress, did they propose a larger budget than given or did the GOP propose a larger budget and Clinton vetoed it? Seems basic civics is a foreign concept for the left as is the ability to research actual data
 
Clinton and Gore had a GOP Congress, did they propose a larger budget than given or did the GOP propose a larger budget and Clinton vetoed it? Seems basic civics is a foreign concept for the left as is the ability to research actual data

You don't want to go there. Clinton and Gore worked with Congressmen and Senators from both Parties. Republicans had control of the House and the Senate for 2 years, and Trump still couldn't work with them!!!
 
You don't want to go there. Clinton and Gore worked with Congressmen and Senators from both Parties. Republicans had control of the House and the Senate for 2 years, and Trump still couldn't work with them!!!

Again, you don't seem to comprehend numbers or even reality. Trump has proposed a 2019 budget, do you support it? Obviously you are either very young or simply very poorly informed having no idea what happened during the 90's with a GOP Congress. Did the Congress give Clinton more or less than he wanted?

Trump has pissed off the establishment on both side and to me that is a plus. I am getting exactly what I voted for, job creation, over 3% annual GDP growth, and the elimination of the anti growth Obama EO's. You are blinded by an ideology and totally incapable of doing any actual research
 
Again, you don't seem to comprehend numbers or even reality. Trump has proposed a 2019 budget, do you support it? Obviously you are either very young or simply very poorly informed having no idea what happened during the 90's with a GOP Congress. Did the Congress give Clinton more or less than he wanted?

Trump has pissed off the establishment on both side and to me that is a plus. I am getting exactly what I voted for, job creation, over 3% annual GDP growth, and the elimination of the anti growth Obama EO's. You are blinded by an ideology and totally incapable of doing any actual research

I get it. You like Trillion dollar deficits. Let's see - the Trump budget. Tax cuts for billionaires, while freezing all pay increases for Federal employees. What's next? Cuts to Social Security and Medicare?
 
I get it. You like Trillion dollar deficits. Let's see - the Trump budget. Tax cuts for billionaires, while freezing all pay increases for Federal employees. What's next? Cuts to Social Security and Medicare?

Not sure what it is about the rich that bothers you so much but people keeping more of what they earn increases economic activity and grows federal revenue. Post the revenue to support your claims. Either post it, admit you are wrong, or leave the forum
 
Not sure what it is about the rich that bothers you so much but people keeping more of what they earn increases economic activity and grows federal revenue. Post the revenue to support your claims. Either post it, admit you are wrong, or leave the forum

Your trickle-down-economics theory has been proven false. Plus, the RICH should pay more taxes as they utilize governmental resources much more than the middle class or the poor--- especially regarding security provided by the Military and Law Enforcement.
 
Your trickle-down-economics theory has been proven false. Plus, the RICH should pay more taxes as they utilize governmental resources much more than the middle class or the poor--- especially regarding security provided by the Military and Law Enforcement.

Three different threads and yet the same partisan rhetoric and posts. Those evil rich people don't have enough money to fund your spending appetite or your liberal ideology. You don't have a clue what taxes you pay or their purpose. Federal Income taxes don't pay for local police and fire departments and approximately 50% of income earners pay zero for our national defense through income taxes
 
1) Cut Fed employees by 25%

2) Cut ALL welfare and payments to illegal aliens

3) Cut all foreign military bases to about 5 world wide.

Federal employees cost about $100,000 in wages + benefits and we have 10 million of them. Cutting them by 25% will save us 250 billion. But where are you cutting them from?

Welfare expenditures are about 460 billion excluding healthcare, and we spend 20 billion on federal illegals benefits. So thats 480 billion.

We are spending about 250 billion on maintaining troops overseas, so maybe we save 150 billion reducing them.

So all told its a savings of 980 billion, which will eliminate our deficit which is 900 billion. Problem is that its projected to rise by another 700 billion or so, we will need to take care of that.
 
Federal employees cost about $100,000 in wages + benefits and we have 10 million of them. Cutting them by 25% will save us 250 billion. But where are you cutting them from?

Welfare expenditures are about 460 billion excluding healthcare, and we spend 20 billion on federal illegals benefits. So thats 480 billion.

We are spending about 250 billion on maintaining troops overseas, so maybe we save 150 billion reducing them.

So all told its a savings of 980 billion, which will eliminate our deficit which is 900 billion. Problem is that its projected to rise by another 700 billion or so, we will need to take care of that.

The best bet is to raise the upper tier tax rate to 50%. Cutting welfare are good Republican buzzwords. Of course, they won't admit that there are people who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional problems. If you really pin them to the wall, they say that the church should take care of these people. Right :roll:
 
The best bet is to raise the upper tier tax rate to 50%. Cutting welfare are good Republican buzzwords. Of course, they won't admit that there are people who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional problems. If you really pin them to the wall, they say that the church should take care of these people. Right :roll:

I think raising taxes on the rich is part of the solution, but we also need to control spending. I'd start with military spending. Its like $800 billion now, we can cut it to 350 billion like it was in the 90s inflation adjusted. But I think part of the problem is that we are supporting too many people. There are 160 million people in the workforce. 140 million are really supporting 20 million working for the government. 8 million workers are classified as in poverty, so that is 132 million supporting another 8 million workers as well, and 40 million poor people total, with almost 50% of the population that uses government benefits of some kind. In addition, the ratio to workers paying people on social security is 3 to 1, and will decline to 2 to 1. We just have too many taking government benefits and not enough payers.
 
I think raising taxes on the rich is part of the solution, but we also need to control spending. I'd start with military spending. Its like $800 billion now, we can cut it to 350 billion like it was in the 90s inflation adjusted. But I think part of the problem is that we are supporting too many people. There are 160 million people in the workforce. 140 million are really supporting 20 million working for the government. 8 million workers are classified as in poverty, so that is 132 million supporting another 8 million workers as well, and 40 million poor people total, with almost 50% of the population that uses government benefits of some kind. In addition, the ratio to workers paying people on social security is 3 to 1, and will decline to 2 to 1. We just have too many taking government benefits and not enough payers.

Good points. A lot of the government benefits are food stamps. In most states, an individual is eligible for food stamps, if he/she has an income less than about $21K. Minimum wage is about $15K for a full-time worker.

Social Security is a tough egg to crack, because the system is already under modification. The 1983 act still hasn't fully gone into effect. Those born 1955 or later, won't be eligible for full benefits until they are 66-years-old. A second tier kicks in later. A modification on top of modifications is something that Mitch McConnell relishes, but it's a bad idea. It also unfairly penalizes the poor and middle class, who paid into the system all their lives, and are most reliant on the payments.
 
Do you just go around spouting out liberal talking points without even examining the facts. Trickle-Down-Economics? Wow there is an imbecilic blast from the past. The Trump tax cut is hardly a tax cut for the rich. Something difficult not to do with the lefts tendency to only tax the upper half of the income scale and their tendency to declare everyone above median income rich. EVERY tax cut has been vilified by the left as a tax cut for the rich. It gets old. Change the record.

What makes you think it is your right to call for higher taxation on any group of people you feel make an easy target. You (and the government) have no right to a disproportionate taxation and benefit structure based solely on the assumption you feel we would all be better served if you decided how to spend the wealth earned by the sweat of another's brows.

How can the tax cuts NOT be for the rich? It does NOTHING for the poor for the government to be starved or burdened with massive debt. How do you say this **** with a straight face?
 
How can the tax cuts NOT be for the rich? It does NOTHING for the poor for the government to be starved or burdened with massive debt. How do you say this **** with a straight face?

Do you have anything else but class envy and jealousy? Tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich, Tax cuts for the Rich!!!! Keep saying it and keep ignoring the actual results generated .
 
Do you have anything else but class envy and jealousy? Tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich, tax cuts for the rich, Tax cuts for the Rich!!!! Keep saying it and keep ignoring the actual results generated .

It's not ****ing jealousy. I'm not poor. My wife and I make over six figures, we own our house and cars, we don't have credit card debt, etc., etc. This system has not failed me. I am like the Catholic who wasn't molested but can still see how the system has thoroughly failed to protect very many others. It's called being honest and caring about other people , conservative, not jealous.

The whole jealosy insult is just your simple-minded way of pretending I don't have a point. I didn't get a tax cut, nor did I need one. The rich DID get a massive tax cut for which this country incurred debt to finance. The rich will not be the ones paying that debt, the poor will, with cuts to their health, education and nutrition.

Hey, I realize that part of belonging to the greed religion is that you are proudly apathetic to others but that can be taken too far. Nobody likes a greedy, uncaring douche.
 
It's not ****ing jealousy. I'm not poor. My wife and I make over six figures, we own our house and cars, we don't have credit card debt, etc., etc. This system has not failed me. I am like the Catholic who wasn't molested but can still see how the system has thoroughly failed to protect very many others. It's called being honest and caring about other people , conservative, not jealous.

The whole jealosy insult is just your simple-minded way of pretending I don't have a point. I didn't get a tax cut, nor did I need one. The rich DID get a massive tax cut for which this country incurred debt to finance. The rich will not be the ones paying that debt, the poor will, with cuts to their health, education and nutrition.

Hey, I realize that part of belonging to the greed religion is that you are proudly apathetic to others but that can be taken too far. Nobody likes a greedy, uncaring douche.

Getting pretty tired of liberals/progressives telling us all how rich they are and then blaming the system that allowed them to generate that income, what exactly are you doing with it other than delegating responsibility to someone else for what you and your wife could do yourself. It you truly cared you wouldn't be here posting but would be out during this holiday season doing something about it like volunteering for charities of interest to you vs, expecting a federal bureaucrat to do it for you

Part of being in a religion means taking responsibility and not delegating it to someone else you always do. My religion is indeed greedy in that it expects people to help others instead of forcing them to do it like you want. Seems that religious people never do what you want them to do thus making it wrong. I feel sorry for people like you but one day you will get it.

My wife of 40 years died six years ago today and she was my best friend. Her legacy lives on in my life of actually helping others while not complaining about you not doing your part. I know that sending dollars to the federal bureaucrats is never the answer, makes you feel good but solves nothing. The dollars I spend go directly to people in need not through some federal agency in hopes of getting something back

And yes it is jealousy because what someone else gets to keep of their own money is none of your damn business. I never cared and celebrate the success of others understanding that the federal bureaucrats aren't the answer and you sure represent that reality
 
Getting pretty tired of liberals/progressives telling us all how rich they are and then blaming the system that allowed them to generate that income, what exactly are you doing with it other than delegating responsibility to someone else for what you and your wife could do yourself. It you truly cared you wouldn't be here posting but would be out during this holiday season doing something about it like volunteering for charities of interest to you vs, expecting a federal bureaucrat to do it for you

Some problems are so big, only a big organization can resolve them. If you don't think that sending money to the "federal bureaucrats" solves anything then you would have left the south to face the malaria that plagued it for so long, eradicated by federal bureaucrats. Malaria was not even close to eradicable by local efforts, the sickness and deaths would have continued with your ignorant thinking. But, no, somebody's taxes were used to help others, many of them poor. Boo ****ing hoo.

Part of being in a religion means taking responsibility and not delegating it to someone else you always do. My religion is indeed greedy in that it expects people to help others instead of forcing them to do it like you want. Seems that religious people never do what you want them to do thus making it wrong. I feel sorry for people like you but one day you will get it.

Religious people are drug addicts who cook their own meth inside their brains. It's an evolved behavior, culturally and physiologically. Once you realize that, that evolution describes EVERY aspect of our being and our habits, it's hard to pretend that all the different gods and demons and heavens and hells aren't just different flavors of the same bull****. And if there is, in fact, some benefit our species derives from believing in magic, then so be it but I don't have to be happy that adults are still playing make believe in order to deal with their problems. The blood is conspicuously present too.

My wife of 40 years died six years ago today and she was my best friend. Her legacy lives on in my life of actually helping others while not complaining about you not doing your part.

If people were doing their part, we wouldn't need to tax them and pay for this GIGANTIC social problem of poverty, a threat bigger and more dangerous than the malaria epidemic. Just blaming people for their being poor is as stupid a solution to poverty as just blaming mosquitoes would have been for the malaria problem.

It's too bad about your wife. No doubt, she was the smart one.

I know that sending dollars to the federal bureaucrats is never the answer, makes you feel good but solves nothing. The dollars I spend go directly to people in need not through some federal agency in hopes of getting something back

Then you've never been in need. If you don't understand how important it is that there be SOME help when all seems lost you've never known real human need. I'm comfortable now but I come from dirt poor West Virginia hillbillies and my wife's people are Mexican. I know that there are many children and old people and mentally ill people who are suffering because of your greed religion. Shame on you for not just ignoring but slandering all the good that federal bureaucrats do.

And yes it is jealousy because what someone else gets to keep of their own money is none of your damn business. I never cared and celebrate the success of others understanding that the federal bureaucrats aren't the answer and you sure represent that reality

Well, you're wrong as **** and your post is paranoid gibberish. Celebrating success is a code word for wealth worship, apparently. Does celebrating success mean you must be apathetic to the unsuccessful? It's one thing to celebrate success it's another to punish hunger and ignorance. What is wrong with you that you can so easily dismiss that contradiction in your thinking knowing, as you must, that the poor are human beings who need certain basic things or else they die or become a plague upon the very country you claim to love? Shall we just ignore reality and pretend the choice is theirs alone? How does that solve anything? That "free will" bull**** you guys spew is a cheap, absurd self exoneration, Trump style, considering how much has been done to keep the poor down.

Rather than feed the federal bureaucrats, you would have children starve or go through life ignorant when WE could have done better for them. I can't comprehend your perspective because it's so cruel at its core. The idea of human cooperation NOT for profit is an abomination to you and the pursuit of money is a virtue. Human rights must trump property rights when lives are at stake. You don't get to watch someone drown because you didn't want your expensive shoes to get wet. Get it? No...probably not.
 
Some problems are so big, only a big organization can resolve them. If you don't think that sending money to the "federal bureaucrats" solves anything then you would have left the south to face the malaria that plagued it for so long, eradicated by federal bureaucrats. Malaria was not even close to eradicable by local efforts, the sickness and deaths would have continued with your ignorant thinking. But, no, somebody's taxes were used to help others, many of them poor. Boo ****ing hoo.



Religious people are drug addicts who cook their own meth inside their brains. It's an evolved behavior, culturally and physiologically. Once you realize that, that evolution describes EVERY aspect of our being and our habits, it's hard to pretend that all the different gods and demons and heavens and hells aren't just different flavors of the same bull****. And if there is, in fact, some benefit our species derives from believing in magic, then so be it but I don't have to be happy that adults are still playing make believe in order to deal with their problems. The blood is conspicuously present too.



If people were doing their part, we wouldn't need to tax them and pay for this GIGANTIC social problem of poverty, a threat bigger and more dangerous than the malaria epidemic. Just blaming people for their being poor is as stupid a solution to poverty as just blaming mosquitoes would have been for the malaria problem.

It's too bad about your wife. No doubt, she was the smart one.



Then you've never been in need. If you don't understand how important it is that there be SOME help when all seems lost you've never known real human need. I'm comfortable now but I come from dirt poor West Virginia hillbillies and my wife's people are Mexican. I know that there are many children and old people and mentally ill people who are suffering because of your greed religion. Shame on you for not just ignoring but slandering all the good that federal bureaucrats do.



Well, you're wrong as **** and your post is paranoid gibberish. Celebrating success is a code word for wealth worship, apparently. Does celebrating success mean you must be apathetic to the unsuccessful? It's one thing to celebrate success it's another to punish hunger and ignorance. What is wrong with you that you can so easily dismiss that contradiction in your thinking knowing, as you must, that the poor are human beings who need certain basic things or else they die or become a plague upon the very country you claim to love? Shall we just ignore reality and pretend the choice is theirs alone? How does that solve anything? That "free will" bull**** you guys spew is a cheap, absurd self exoneration, Trump style, considering how much has been done to keep the poor down.

Rather than feed the federal bureaucrats, you would have children starve or go through life ignorant when WE could have done better for them. I can't comprehend your perspective because it's so cruel at its core. The idea of human cooperation NOT for profit is an abomination to you and the pursuit of money is a virtue. Human rights must trump property rights when lives are at stake. You don't get to watch someone drown because you didn't want your expensive shoes to get wet. Get it? No...probably not.

You aren't worth the effort, nothing changes the mind of someone so indoctrinated they don't have a clue. Have a good one.
 
You aren't worth the effort, nothing changes the mind of someone so indoctrinated they don't have a clue. Have a good one.

Yes, go away. The truth hurts, huh?
 
The Federal budget will never become balanced UNLESS we repeal both the 16th and 17th amendments, requiring the Federal government to tax only the States as originally intended proportionate to their population of the total, eliminating any Federal redistribution of the revenue for social welfare spending within each State, with the sole exception of Social Security and Medicare. Voters would then exercise much greater caution in their selection of representatives for Federal office so that less of their tax dollars collected by their State are being spent by the Federal government so that more of it can be spent within their State as they find necessary. The Federal budget would then remain balanced each year as the States and the people would both look to cut Federal spending as they would HAVE to be taxed or their States borrow to pay their share of the Federal budget fully.
 
Yes, go away. The truth hurts, huh?

There is nothing that will ever change the mind of a passionate progressive thus a waste of time. What you post are opinions that defy civics, history, logic, and common sense along with the true role of the Federal Govt. You buy what people who you want to believe tell you and ignore the foundation upon which this country was built then attack Religion for whatever reason. If anyone had a reason to attack religion it would be me as I lost my wife and was devastated. She never got mad at God nor will I and regardless of what you believe I know exactly where she is.

Our Country was built with a limited central govt. and has grown to a massive monstrosity that still isn't big enough, After 8 years of Obama we still have over 27 million uninsured, we had record numbers of part time employment created, we had more people on poverty and homeless with the social problems growing but your answer is give more power to the bureaucrats along with more money. You have a six digit income but the question what you are doing with it. Sending money to the bureaucrats may make you feel good but does nothing to solve social problems. Where does your state get its money when more money goes to the federal bureaucrats? No radical liberal or progressive ever answers that question nor what does PROMOTE DOMESTIC WELFARE mean.

This is why you are a waste of time and only time will change your mind as the more taxes you pay the less results you get and finally, maybe then you will get it
 
There is nothing that will ever change the mind of a passionate progressive thus a waste of time. What you post are opinions that defy civics, history, logic, and common sense along with the true role of the Federal Govt. You buy what people who you want to believe tell you and ignore the foundation upon which this country was built then attack Religion for whatever reason. If anyone had a reason to attack religion it would be me as I lost my wife and was devastated. She never got mad at God nor will I and regardless of what you believe I know exactly where she is.

Our Country was built with a limited central govt. and has grown to a massive monstrosity that still isn't big enough, After 8 years of Obama we still have over 27 million uninsured, we had record numbers of part time employment created, we had more people on poverty and homeless with the social problems growing but your answer is give more power to the bureaucrats along with more money. You have a six digit income but the question what you are doing with it. Sending money to the bureaucrats may make you feel good but does nothing to solve social problems. Where does your state get its money when more money goes to the federal bureaucrats? No radical liberal or progressive ever answers that question nor what does PROMOTE DOMESTIC WELFARE mean.

This is why you are a waste of time and only time will change your mind as the more taxes you pay the less results you get and finally, maybe then you will get it

OK, since the entirety of my very rational arguments have been ignored and I don't want to have to repeat myself to someone unable to comprehend the logic thereof, I'll respond to your current post.

Saying the country was built upon a limited government is a pretty dumb way of addressing our reality. The country was also built on institutionalized bigotry too. Should that have remained our way of doing things? Consider, if you're capable of independent thought, how much every aspect of human culture has changed since the country was founded. This is why conservatives get accused of being delusionoids. They like to pretend that change is unnecessary or avoidable when it's clearly not.

Our country was FAR from perfect at it's founding and the way all of you clown-servatives keep ignoring that is a glaring indication of how ignorant and stagnant your thinking is. Furthermore, to talk about limited government after you guys put a man in the Whitehouse who recognizes NO limit to his authority is comically dumb.

So, why don't you, rather than making saints out of slavers and Christian dominionists, accept that this country is FAR better, in very many ways, than it was at it's founding and moving the country backwards is reckless, ignorant and literally reeks of nostalgia for a pre-human rights era.

Understand, I write these truths with absolutely ZERO hope that you will ever give a **** about making America great, only returning to a dumber, more hateful time.
 
The Federal budget will never become balanced UNLESS we repeal both the 16th and 17th amendments, requiring the Federal government to tax only the States as originally intended proportionate to their population of the total, eliminating any Federal redistribution of the revenue for social welfare spending within each State, with the sole exception of Social Security and Medicare. Voters would then exercise much greater caution in their selection of representatives for Federal office so that less of their tax dollars collected by their State are being spent by the Federal government so that more of it can be spent within their State as they find necessary. The Federal budget would then remain balanced each year as the States and the people would both look to cut Federal spending as they would HAVE to be taxed or their States borrow to pay their share of the Federal budget fully.

The 16th and 17th Amendments were ratified in 1913. Yet, the last time the United States was debt free was 1835.
 
Back
Top Bottom