‘Let’s get fiscal, fiscal — let me hear your lobby talk’

National-Debt-GDP

Source: Zfacts.com

Democrats and Republicans agree that we have to address the nation’s long-term fiscal stability. Beyond that point, though, there’s little common ground.

So let’s try to keep this discussion grounded in political reality. Does anybody SERIOUSLY believe that a problem this large can be addressed solely through spending cuts? Raise your hands out there if you believe that …

I do see a few hands raised out there. In fact, looking over to the right, I see quite a few. Well, you’re not taking the problem seriously then. You may claim to believe that this issue threatens the nation’s future, but your actions say otherwise. Forced to choose between fiscal insolvency and tax hikes, you are choosing fiscal insolvency, and to hell with the country.

In the real political world in which votes have to be cast and deals have to be made, you cannot do it solely through spending cuts. The numbers involved are much too large. You would have to go to where the money really is, the major programs from the Pentagon budget to Social Security to Medicare, and the cuts in those programs would have to be so large and so deep as to politically unsustainable. If Republicans actually tried to implement the solution they claim to want, it would be political suicide and they know it.

Now, I’m sure there are a few Democrats in Congress who would like to pretend the opposite, that the budget can be balanced exclusively through tax hikes, particularly on the rich, with no real spending cuts. That position is just as much of a fantasy as its counterpart on the right, the no-new-taxes approach. But the good news is, the relatively few Democrats who take that position do not lead the party. President Obama, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, among others, recognize that any solution will have to require both tax increases and spending cuts. When Obama’s bipartisan commission on the budget makes its report to Congress, it is expected to include both approaches.

But the problem is, Obama and the Democrats have no partners on the Republican side. The ongoing purge of any Republican who might think or say something reasonable on the issues of taxes has so terrified the Washington GOP that it has ensured that no negotiation, and no solution, will be possible.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah

Take, for example, Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah. Next year he’s scheduled to become ranking minority member of the Senate Finance Committee, which means he will be committee chairman if the Republicans get control of the Senate.

Hatch has watched Republicans back home oust his longtime conservative colleague, Bob Bennett, because Bennett only toed the conservative line 99 times out of 100. He’s scared about his own future, eager to placate the mob back home.

According to The Hill, conservative pressure groups are pushing Hatch to promise that when the budget commission reports, he will rule out any consideration of tax hikes whatsoever.

“We’d like to get a commitment from all Republicans on the Finance panel to oppose new taxes,” said Andrew Roth, vice president for government affairs at the Club for Growth. “It would be political suicide for Orrin Hatch to not do so.”

Hatch says he will not make any commitment to block proposals from Obama’s deficit commission before he has a chance to review specific policy changes.

But Hatch says the Club for Growth can rest assured.

“I like the Club for Growth,” he said. “I don’t make commitments in advance until I see all the facts. I think they can pretty well rely that I don’t believe in increasing taxes at this time. I think we should reduce taxes.”

He thinks we should reduce taxes.

I have my differences with Hatch, but I’ve never thought him to be a stupid man. He knows better than that; he knows that would be disastrous for this country. But he’s doing what he thinks is necessary to save his political career. Some patriot, huh?

Conservatives love to point to the example of Greece, warning that the United States could end up in that position unless we change our ways. They conveniently forget that Greece’s problems have two major components. Yes, their social programs became too generous and their public bureaucracies too fat and lazy. But the Greeks also refused to tax themselves at a reasonable level, pretending they could get all these benefits for free. With collapse staring them in the face, they are being forced to slash government spending AND get serious about improving the revenue side of the ledger.

Anybody who complains about the debt but goes onto to oppose any tax increase — or to advocate further tax cuts — is a hypocrite more devoted to a precious political theory than to the country they claim to love.

399 comments Add your comment

Majority's Rules

May 28th, 2010
10:10 am

That is just so 80’s, Jay. And, do I detect a hint of Glee in that title.

joe matarotz

May 28th, 2010
10:21 am

Scrap Federal Income Tax and implement the fair tax. And just to keep it fair, how about a sliding scale, where single purchases over a tcertain threshhold (10K? 50K? 100K?) are taxed at a higher rate. That would allow low end items to be taxed at a lower rate, representing a lower % of income for low wage earners, who are extremely unlikely to make those single item large purchases. This would work nicely.

Finn McCool

May 28th, 2010
10:23 am

‘Let’s get fiscal, fiscal — let me hear your lobby talk’

Jay’s on Friday-time.

Finn McCool

May 28th, 2010
10:26 am

Why does it go up like a rocket whenever Republicans are in office??

fiscally-conservative, born-again, right-thinking, fair and balanced news: just words

Peadawg

May 28th, 2010
10:27 am

So, instead of cutting spending, you propose to raise taxes? If you did BOTH, that would be ok. But, you can’t do one w/out the other.

Peadawg

May 28th, 2010
10:28 am

The problem w/ the fair tax is it would put H&R Block and other accountants out of business/work.

HDB

May 28th, 2010
10:28 am

The question that looms over this debate is two-fold: 1) What gets cut in the name of fiscal responsibility…and 2) How much of a tax increase is needed to bring back solvency??

The persistence of conservatives of maintaining tax cuts while noting that NO war in this nation has been previously financed without a tax increase speaks volumes; the persistence of liberals of funding necessary social programs without a limit on expenditures also speaks volumes.

What needs to be done is a freeze on government spending for 2 years, coupled with a progressive tax increase contingent upon the tax bracket…and within four years, let’s see where the nation’s fiscal capability lies……

Kamchak

May 28th, 2010
10:30 am

FairTax—SQUIRREL!

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:31 am

dammit, Jay … that is one evil earwig.

HDB

May 28th, 2010
10:31 am

The problem with the Fair Tax is that it ISN’T fair…..but another tax shift towards the middle class while granting the wealthy MORE tax breaks!! The tax systems needs to be more progressive than it is currently! In the Eisenhower Administration, the tax rate for the wealthy was 90%….and no one complained……..

Jay

May 28th, 2010
10:32 am

Peadawg, I think you need to read it a second time.

Or maybe a first time.

Finn McCool

May 28th, 2010
10:33 am

the mob back home LOL

which means he will be committee chairman if the Republicans get control of the Senate. So we have no worries there.

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
10:34 am

Sounds like Jay has been watching “Glee” ;)

Keep up the good fight!

May 28th, 2010
10:37 am

But…but…but… if you cut taxes, then people spend more and that means a larger economy…. so ideally, lets cut taxes to zero and magically the economy expands and we have more tax revenue….because… oh wait….

Seriously, its going to be a long hard battle… and pay as you go is a nice theory but sometimes you have to spend more to save…just like insulating a house costs more upfront but you save more over time…. Some sacred cows have to be cut and we have to get out of these wars and cut military spending (as well as use dollars smarter). Fees for some areas have to be raised (oh lets start with oil leasing fees and inspection fees). Simplify the tax code (fair tax is a pipe dream, it will never happen) and increase collections.

Finn McCool

May 28th, 2010
10:37 am

Orin Hatch: Is he turtle #2 behind McConnell

That chart shows how our country gets screwed in favor of the rich whenever republicans get to the white house

Truth Hurts

May 28th, 2010
10:38 am

There is a third option.

Declare bankruptcy, enemize Washington of the banksters, frauds, and corruptocrats, and start over.

Have Rand Paul and Judge Napolitano lead the way.

This might happen whether we choose it or not.

stands for decibels

May 28th, 2010
10:39 am

Or maybe a first time.

I’ve been thinking for awhile now that a solid majority of the commenters here never bother to read Jay’s posts beyond the headline and maybe the purty picture.

Not much you can do about that whole “makin’ ‘em drink” business.

stands for decibels

May 28th, 2010
10:39 am

whoa, jcb, you’re back? everything ok?

Truth Hurts

May 28th, 2010
10:40 am

And draft Clark Howard as treasurer.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

May 28th, 2010
10:41 am

Well, Bookman is just plain wrong. Me and my buddy Jim Earl and my other buddy Joe Bill come up with a plan that will get us back to a balanced budget and save us all a ton of money. Here it is:

1. Cut out all the welfare programs. This includes Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, Aid to Dependent Families, and everything else that ain’t for supporting our troops or building good roads. Let the bums and the old geezers fend for theirselfs. We ain’t their Sugar Daddy.

2. Keep the defense budget like it is, maybe increase it a little. We got to have wars or people like me won’t be Free to give everybody our opinion.

3. Cut taxes to zero. Everybody knows if you cut taxes the guvmint takes in alot more money. So far we’ve just been nibbling around the edges. But if you cut out all taxes the guvmint income will raise 100%. Businesses will use the extra money they don’t spend for taxes to hire more people. Guvmint will have so much money they’ll be hiring more people too. Pretty soon they’ll be fighting over us. Wages will go sky-high and we’ll all be able to shop at WalMart as much as we like. There won’t be no unemployment and we’ll be able to chase the Red Chinese down and pay them without mercy. The national debt will be gone. Heck, we’ll have so much money we might could even throw in a train or two for the libruls.

It’s simple and it’ll work. No charge for the advise. Have a good day everybody.

Gator Joe

May 28th, 2010
10:41 am

Jay,
It appears Social Security, Medicare, and Defense are the three big areas of spending. Of the three, I believe Defense might be the most fertile area to look for cuts. Cuts in welfare and similar programs might make the Right feel good but wouldn’t do much to affect the debt or the deficit. By the way, the unpaid bill for the Bush/Cheney’s illegimate war has come due. Time for the Republicans, Right Wing, Conservatives, and the Tea Party to pay for that trillion, with having their taxes increased, then we can talk about tax and spending cuts.

stands for decibels

May 28th, 2010
10:41 am

Sorry, veering off topic. Yes, obviously we need to address our long-delayed tax hikes and we need to address spending. We took baby steps toward the latter with HCR but we’re going to have to stop protecting NATO countries from a land invasion by the Soviet Union, me thinks, as well.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:42 am

“And draft Clark Howard as treasurer”

that’s the first thing you’ve said today that I can back 100%

Lord Help Us

May 28th, 2010
10:42 am

Jay, get real. Does any Republican honest enough to say that taxes will need to be raised as PART of an OVERALL solution to reduce our national debt…have ANY chance to be elected??????

It is absolutely reasonable and beyond debate in terms of being practical, but, face it, that candidate could never be elected on a GOP ticket.

Thus, the ‘fiscally conservative’ GOP voter will continue to get exactly what they got with Reagan/Bush and Bush/Cheney. In reality, they only get concerned about deficits when a Dem is in the oval office…

One would think that they would learn, but…oh well…

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:44 am

… all’s I know is … if we could strap something on Sarah Palin and harness the power of her melodramatics, we could power the country and reduce our reliance on foreign oil.

I mean … talk about a drama llama …

Saul Good

May 28th, 2010
10:44 am

Ahh… using a chart from one of my favorite fact sites I see. Pretty obvious that Reagan and both Bush administrations had no regard for the National Debt. Even Carter reduced it during his term. Clinton wiped it out (remember that National Debt Clock in NYC near Madison Sq. Garden anyone? It was shut off by the end of Clinton’s term. They fired it back up not too long into baby Bush’s first term. As far as seeing it rise now during Obama’s term… there’s no choice… just like WWII we need massive spending to dig us out of the “almost” depression the last administration left us in. The Bush tax cuts (which created ZERO jobs by the end of his administration and actually LOST jobs) on top of two wars and massive spending sunk the ship. You can CLEARLY see that every administration starting with Truman contributed to paying down that massive debt until Reagan/Bush41. The chart does NOT lie… check out zfacts and look at some of the other statistics that will show you how the “GREAT ONE” and heor of the Talibangelical Right: Ronnie Reagan started the sinking of our economy. Another nice “fact” that you can find is that the MOST jobs created by any president in our history was Clinton…more then 12 years of Reagan/Bush… Reagan Bush also ADDED more to the poverty level (but Baby Bush wins the prize on that one)…. Reagan/Bush also had inflation rise under their reign….Need the FACTS? Okay:
http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-03.html

FTA:

“Most New Jobs Ever Created Under a Single Administration: The economy has created more than 22.5 million jobs in less than eight years—the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, are in the private sector.

Unemployment at Its Lowest Level in More than 30 Years: Overall unemployment has dropped to the lowest level in more than 30 years, down from 6.9 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in November 2000. The unemployment rate has been below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months.

Lowest Inflation since the 1960s: Inflation is at the lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, and it is down from 4.7 percent during the previous administration.

7 Million Fewer Americans Living in Poverty: The poverty rate has declined from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 11.8 percent last year, the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. ”

GOT FACTS? Post them… you can post all the blame you want about the dems…yet they have been WAY better for our economy for the past 30 years. The “proof” lies in the FACTS and STATISTICS. So before you blow your stack….make sure you back up what you are about to rant about. ;-)

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
10:46 am

stands for decibels,

Hey there! Yep, I got back last night. I spent a while in Kyoto, Kobe and Shiga. An awesome place to clear your head and put things in perspective.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:46 am

hey jewcowboy! glad to see you back safe and sound!!! :-)

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
10:48 am

HDB – I do not understand how the Fair Tax unfairly shifts the burden to middle class. Would you please explain. (Apologies to those who already know.)

Grumpy

May 28th, 2010
10:48 am

Jay said: “But the good news is, the relatively few Democrats who take that position do not lead the party. President Obama, Senator Reid and Speaker Pelosi, among others, recognize that any solution will have to require both tax increases and spending cuts. When Obama’s bipartisan commission on the budget makes its report to Congress, it is expected to include both approaches.”

Please show your work, Jay! When the heck has Nancy Pelosi or Harry Reid EVER proposed scaling back any of our bloated entitlement spending?

Saul Good

May 28th, 2010
10:48 am

Another thing Clinton did that the republicans always TRY to take credit for (from the link I posted above):

“Enacted the 1993 Deficit Reduction Plan without a Single Republican Vote.”

So….before you Talibangelicals start saying that it was the Republican Majority (moral majority right…hehe)… that takes credit for the deficit reduction and the surplus he left behind… try again. Wrong!

Keep up the good fight!

May 28th, 2010
10:49 am

Usink….now stay away from her swimming “hole”… let’s tax higher fences.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:51 am

Penn – “I do not understand how the Fair Tax unfairly shifts the burden to middle class”

because the poor and middle-class pay a greater % of their income on the items that will be taxed than the wealthy

stands for decibels

May 28th, 2010
10:51 am

An awesome place to clear your head and put things in perspective.

on my short list, some day…

Proud American

May 28th, 2010
10:51 am

Jay, why is it when a group of conservatives come togather, meet, voice a concern, or even exist do you and the rest of the liberal left label them as the mob or other derogatorical names.

( He’s scared about his own future, eager to placate the mob back home.)

What would you have him do ignore his constituents ? Thats what the left has been doing.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:52 am

keep up … all I can say – a swimming pool in Alaska … I hope it doubles as a hockey rink for the remaining 10 months of the year …

md

May 28th, 2010
10:53 am

My guess – the misfits continue to point fingers at each other for several more years until we reach the point of a “Greece”, at which time they will be forced to do something. Only then will something get done.

And the side choosers on here need to take that chart with a grain of salt – congress played a big part, and both sides contributed to the ups and downs. By pointing the finger at one side or the other tends to make the pointer look silly.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
10:54 am

md – “congress played a big part”

you realize that, during the Reagan years, Congress passed SMALLER budgets than he requested, don’t you …

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
10:55 am

Jay, why is it that you are laying into the Right about a problem the Left created in the article? Why aren’t you laying into the left? I mean, c’mon.

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
10:57 am

Hi USinUK! Thanks.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
10:57 am

USinUK – because the poor and middle-class pay a greater % of their income on the items that will be taxed than the wealthy

That is true, but the middle class is already buying those items, and therefore already are being taxed.

md

May 28th, 2010
10:57 am

“We took baby steps toward the latter with HCR but we’re going to have to stop protecting NATO countries from a land invasion by the Soviet Union, me thinks, as well.”

NATO?? You mean USUKTO – right??

Needs to be abolished all together.

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
10:58 am

USinUK – “because the poor and middle-class pay a greater % of their income on the items that will be taxed than the wealthy”. Under Fair Tax, everyone gets a prebate to offset taxes on necessities. Poor people and middle class people who continue to buy new cars, boats, houses, etc. are volunteering to pay tax.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
10:59 am

I love how Jay commends the Dems on their approach to pay for their out of control spending. That’s like your neighbor setting your house on fire and then offering you a good deal on reparing it. Priceless Jay.

md

May 28th, 2010
11:00 am

“you realize that, during the Reagan years, Congress passed SMALLER budgets than he requested, don’t you …”

Congress has the option of not approving the budget – any budget – hence it played a large part throughout history. To just look at that chart and say “my guys” did such and such is being dishonest.

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
11:00 am

Fair Tax, Flat Tax, whatever. Cut spending, raise taxes only if necessary. But get rid of the income tax and the IRS.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:00 am

C’mon Jay – “That is true, but the middle class is already buying those items, and therefore already are being taxed”

really? there is already a federal sales / VAT tax?? gosh, you might want to spread that news around …

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
11:01 am

Looking at this chart it looks like things blew up in 1980, when I was 7 years old. I think all tax increases should be on those who were 25 and up in 1980. You started this fire…not pay for the hose to put it out.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:01 am

md – “Congress has the option of not approving the budget – any budget – hence it played a large part throughout history”

yeah. that worked REALLY well in 1995.

HDB

May 28th, 2010
11:02 am

Pennsylvanian May 28th, 2010
10:48 am

Here’s where the shift occurs: The Fair Tax tax bracket would be reduced on the upper income brackets, thereby reducing their tax burden, causing a shift downward towards middle incomes. Those whose tax capabilities balance to zero…and pay no taxes….also force a tax shift upward to the middle class!! The middle class would be socked with a tax increase that could be as high as 30%….and the wealthy get a tax CUT as high as 65%.

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
11:02 am

“not pay for the hose to put it out.”

“now”..not “not”…my apologies.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:03 am

“Fair Tax, everyone gets a prebate to offset taxes on necessities. Poor people and middle class people who continue to buy new cars, boats, houses, etc. are volunteering to pay tax”

even better! so all food is going to be tax-free? and all clothes are going to be tax-free? and all utilities are going to be tax-free?

and we’re going to fund the government on people who buy boats and houses and cars …

oh, yeah … that’s gonna work …

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:03 am

USinUK-

I think you just need to log off today and take a nap. You seem to be forgetting that the Fair Tax replaces all other taxes, it does not add on to existing taxes. Therefore, no additional burden will be realized. Now go take a nap dude!

itpdude

May 28th, 2010
11:05 am

Only cutting spending to deal with the debt is like only cutting consumption to deal with the energy crisis.

Oh yeah, the latter is exactly what many on the Left would have us do. . . . guess infantile beliefs are not the strict purview of the Right.

I think before we raise taxes and cut spending, we have to make sure the recovery is on firm ground. Another thing we need to look at, and Bernanke is rejecting this, is the money supply. It is contracting at 1929-1933 rates. Remember, Milton Friedman won his Nobel with his works showing how the Great Depression was largely a money-supply problem.

Finally, the graphic you include in this story illustrates a Great Lie in American politics: That the Dems are the spenders and the GOP holds tight to the purse-strings.

Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:06 am

In my post, I didn’t want to get into who caused this problem, because my intent was to focus on how to resolve it.

But those who try to blame it exclusively or even largely on the left have no factual basis for that effort, as the chart above documents quite well.

Kamchak

May 28th, 2010
11:06 am

The flaw of the FairTax, is and always will be in the politics. It will never pass as written and by the time the lobbyists get through with it, it will in no way resemble the bill that Boortz has brainwashed people into believing.

Outhouse GoKart

May 28th, 2010
11:08 am

Hmm…Sestak was approached by Bill Clinton, who couldnt make an offer without an available position in the White House or appointment by the Obama administration. Is it that Rahm E is the lowest common denominator between Clinton and Obama?

I guess it depends on what the definition of is, is?

md

May 28th, 2010
11:08 am

“yeah. that worked REALLY well in 1995.”

I’m guessing 1995 will seem like a cakewalk once the poo really hits the fan. I have no clue as to what the solution will be, but I certainly see the problem – and it ain’t pretty.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:08 am

Jay, dude, you’re kidding right? You mean to tell me that the financial well being (or lack there of) is not largely attributable to Barack? Seriously? The Repubs are not saints, to be sure. But the Dem’s spending is out of control.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:08 am

CJ – “I think you just need to log off today and take a nap. You seem to be forgetting that the Fair Tax replaces all other taxes, it does not add on to existing taxes. Therefore, no additional burden will be realized. Now go take a nap dude!”

well, I never say no to a nap … but I still have a couple more hours before I head home …

if you honestly believe that the “fair tax” (which isn’t) will replace all other taxes, then go with god and good luck to you.

however, the fact of the matter is, consumer spending is too volatile for government to rely on for income, so even if they DID implement a VAT, it would be an additional tax, it would never be a stand-alone …

… now, if you want to talk about FLAT taxes, I’m right there with ya – it’s an idea whose time has come …

laissez faire

May 28th, 2010
11:09 am

I’m not paying higher taxes, that’s just a simple fact. Whether that means thru electing supply side politicians or tax avoidance, whatever works. The only way to wipe out these deficits is to end Social Security and Medicare. They are not guaranteed benefits, and anyone who trusted the government to take care of them (actually to do anything OTHER THAN screw them ) is an idiot anyway.

stands for decibels

May 28th, 2010
11:10 am

In my post, I didn’t want to get into who caused this problem, because my intent was to focus on how to resolve it.

There you go again, Jay, assuming the righties here actually read beyond your headline and pretty pictures.

Pretty sure most of ‘em don’t bother.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:10 am

md – 11:08 – the US is nowhere NEAR the situation Greece was in – at the very least, the US has VASTLY better revenue collection than Greece does …

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:12 am

USinUK-

You keep using referring to a VAT…I’m talking about the Fair Tax…which most certainly is not a VAT. Sounds like we’re on the same page with a Flat tax…

Outhouse GoKart

May 28th, 2010
11:12 am

Good News for Obama in the Sestak/Obama Gate. Since Clinton is involved and if he is called to testify, under oath before Congress, he simply will lie, omit, misrepresent or conceal…

Seems Obama has no worrys.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:13 am

CJ – simply put, “fair tax” is a national sales tax – which is a VAT

Semi-Nihilist

May 28th, 2010
11:13 am

How about we institute a real fair tax and tax all types of income at the same rates? There is no real justification to taxing capital gains, dividends, or estates at much much lower rates than honest work.

HDB

May 28th, 2010
11:13 am

Pennsylvanian May 28th, 2010
10:58 am

“Under Fair Tax, everyone gets a prebate to offset taxes on necessities.”

The problems are that the prebate will not allow anyone to recover the TAXES paid on necessities (utilities, food, prescriptions, gasoline, et. al.)….and for the middle class to be properly afffected with the prebate, the prebate would need to be equivalent to the first 50K for single, 100K for married……(figures can be adjusted) for the proper taxation scenario to take effect. Only then, will the taxation curve shift progressively upward so that the middle class isn’t as affected as it would be under the current Fair Tax proposals!!

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:13 am

Stands for Decibles – and there you go again…piling on the ‘righties’ instead of trying to see the big picture.

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
11:14 am

“But those who try to blame it exclusively or even largely on the left have no factual basis for that effort, as the chart above documents quite well.” ~ Jay

I blame it on everyone 55 years old and older. You created this mess and are riding off into your golden sunset, leaving it for Gen X and younger to deal with.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:15 am

UsinK – because the poor and middle-class pay a greater % of their income on the items that will be taxed than the wealthy

Go read the bill again. It is clearly not a VAT…and I mean clearly. It replaces the current taxes…not adds to them. If you can’t understand that….well, then…I don’t know what else to say to you.

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
11:15 am

Me, I’m thinking I might cash in my chips, move to Mexico. They like illegal immigrants in Mexico, don’t they?

Kamchak

May 28th, 2010
11:17 am

jewcoyboy

Please allow me to also wish you a warm welcome home.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:18 am

CJ – I understand that it’s not meant to ADD to taxes … but I’m telling you that, as sure as I’m sitting here, it will. there is no way you can run the country on a sales tax

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:18 am

Hey Kam … I hear there’s some kind of sporting even starting in 2 weeks … do you know anything about it???

md

May 28th, 2010
11:19 am

“md – 11:08 – the US is nowhere NEAR the situation Greece was in – at the very least, the US has VASTLY better revenue collection than Greece does …”

cbo, which is usually low in their estimates, says 1 trillion for the next 10 years – with a sluggish economy, how long do you think it is going to take to get there??

Probably quicker than you think. And remember, cbo’s #’s are based on a growing economy – heaven forbid it goes the other way.

We are playing the lottery with the economy, hoping we all win the jackpot. Nobody wants to even think about everything going the other way, but guess what – it’s 50/50 the way I see it.

Moderate Line

May 28th, 2010
11:19 am

But the Greeks also refused to tax themselves at a reasonable level, pretending they could get all these benefits for free.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Based on the OCED data that doesn’t really seem to be a factual statement. Greece’s taxes were the equavlent of Canada but yet Canada does a better job balancing it’s budget.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=307&Topic2id=95

HDB

May 28th, 2010
11:19 am

C’mon Jay May 28th, 2010
11:15 am

You are forgetting sales taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes, state taxes, estate taxes, ad valorem taxes,…..the Fair Tax will be in addition to these!!

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
11:19 am

Kamchak,

Thanks! Good to be back.

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
11:20 am

C’mon Jay – I don’t believe USinUK or HDB actually read the Fair Tax bill. They don’t want to consider anything that would diminish the ability of politicians and bureaucrats to manipulate the economy with the IRS code.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:20 am

I saw a bumper sticker yesterday:

Congressman should serve two terms, one in Congress and one in jail

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
11:22 am

HDB – You just proved my point. Read the bill.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:22 am

Penn – actually, if you scroll up, you’ll see that I’m all about the Flat Tax – that would eradicate the IRS code manipulation FAR MORE than any kind of tax that involves “prebates” and such …

tm

May 28th, 2010
11:23 am

Instead of a millionair tax, I vote to increase the tax rate of all editorial writers of all US newspapers to 70 percent, I am sure we will not see any of them giving up their jobs or leave their profession because of a tax increase.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:24 am

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:25 am

HDB – You are forgetting sales taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes, state taxes, estate taxes, ad valorem taxes,…..the Fair Tax will be in addition to these!!

The Fair Tax is a federal issue, so it replace the current sales tax. Gas taxes are not going away and the Fair Tax need not address that. Ad Valorem is a ’state’ tax, so cross those out too. It gets tiring trying to educate nay-sayers on here….go read the bill…

washedup

May 28th, 2010
11:27 am

The comments on this blog about the Fair Tax illustrate the need for a complete, and “fair”, debate of this bill in the Ways & Means committee, which has not yet taken place. It may not be the perfect solution, but it certainly would be a step in the right direction. When Americans spend 300 billion dollars a year just to comply with our ridiculous tax code, something needs to be done.

BMDPD

May 28th, 2010
11:27 am

The only way to get out is to do both. I think most people with any common sense would agree.

Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:28 am

I read the FairTax bill, and the book, and it’s all a bunch of hooey.

Even the GOP knows it. For all the years that the Republicans controlled Congress, they didn’t even schedule one subcommittee meeting to discuss the FairTax. Not one. That’s how dead-on-arrival the idea is.

BMDPD

May 28th, 2010
11:28 am

Canada has what for a military. They know we will protect them. Your argument is flawed.

washedup

May 28th, 2010
11:29 am

Well, you should certainly know hooey when you see it, being such an expert on spreading it.

Pennsylvanian

May 28th, 2010
11:30 am

USinUK – I stand corrected. I’m ok with a flat tax so long as they don’t get it all wadded up with bizarre exceptions thrown in by every lobbying group.

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:30 am

Jay – 11:28 – but … but … but … Neil Boortz luuuuuuuuvs him some “fair tax”, so it’s GOTTA be viable!

BMDPD

May 28th, 2010
11:31 am

OFF TOPIC, but….

FROM AJC “WH used Clinton to get Sestak out of Pa. race”

USinUK

May 28th, 2010
11:31 am

Penn – 11:30 – see? we can agree on something. :-)

Outhouse GoKart

May 28th, 2010
11:32 am

“Fair Tax” LOL…No such thing.

Take the devil ya know vs the devil ya dont.

Outhouse GoKart

May 28th, 2010
11:32 am

“Fair Tax” LOL…No such thing.

Take the devil ya know vs the devil ya dont.

C'mon Jay

May 28th, 2010
11:32 am

Jay – is it DOA because they know that the media (you) would spin it as a VAT?? and therefore the Repubs would continue to be the evil villians who only favor the rich. That’s really what you are saying, right?

jewcowboy

May 28th, 2010
11:32 am

Thanks to the “Greatest Generation” and “Baby Boomers”, my generation is the first to see its economic mobility move backward instead of forward. In the past 10 years we’ve seen our futures stagnate due to the excesses of those who ruled the country before us.

There are those “conservatives” that speak of a “backlash” in November. You have no concept of the backlash coming, but it won’t be right vs. left. It will be generational. Already those graduating college with no hope of employment are realizing this, and it will keep accelerating.

As younger generations start to realize how the 55+ crowd sold their futures out for Club Med vacations, BMW’s and cheap oil, this country will really start to understand the term “backlash.”

BMDPD

May 28th, 2010
11:34 am

I always thought fair tax was to tax the upper 50% of earners. It must be. That is what we are doing. Am I wrong?