The fair share... the first year is about to be spent

[SemiAuto]

Our current spending/revenue is comparable to WWII era spending/revenue levels if adjusted for inflation.

If we don't adjust for inflation then the economy is doing fine.

Afterall, if we're bringing in record levels of revenue the we must have full employment right

False. High government revenue clearly does not correlate with employment. Obviously, neither does uncontrolled spending.

Seriously, the solution most likely lies outside the realm of government intervention.

[soulflower]

IIRC, 2012 was the 2nd highest amount of revenue for the government. So how do you find that fact laughable.

If economic growth is the key to deficit reduction then how does the lost opportunity costs of higher taxes fit in?

Taxes don't have a major impact on economic growth. Look at the economic growth in the 80s and 90s that followed Reagan and Clinton's tax increases.

I've already shown you that fiscal restraint via the policies of Canada have historically worked and that the Krugman based faux austerity policies of higher taxes and spending don't.

Canada's fiscal restraint kept them from getting the same cancer that ails the US and EU economies. You're comparing apples to oranges...

[soulflower]

False. High government revenue clearly does not correlate with employment. Obviously, neither does uncontrolled spending.

Then explain why tax revenue was 19% of GDP during Clinton's second term when 20 million jobs were created and is 16% of GDP now...

[banner1124]

That makes no sense as government spending is at record levels and is not getting the recovery off the ground. More evidence that spending is the problem and not the solution. Thanks!

If I make more money but don't pay more in taxes then that is not a decline in tax revenue for the government. Thus the percentage of GDP argument falls flat.

The problem is almost entirely spending. The first year of Obama's tax increases are about to be spent. This is not a revenue problem.

That analogy is what falls flat. You couldn't have missed the mark more.

[SemiAuto]

Then explain why tax revenue was 19% of GDP during Clinton's second term when 20 million jobs were created and is 16% of GDP now...

Private sector growth, mostly in technology. Clinton also shrank the size of government as a percent of GDP. In this regards he is practically the opposite of Obama.

[soulflower]

Private sector growth, mostly in technology. Clinton also shrank the size of government as a percent of GDP. In this regards he is practically the opposite of Obama.

We're talking about revenue.

Tax revenue is typically 18-19% of GDP when we have full employment.

Tax revenue at 15-16% of GDP, where it is now, certainly isn't a sign of a healthy economy...

[flyboy56]

We're talking about revenue.

Tax revenue is typically 18-19% of GDP when we have full employment.

Tax revenue at 15-16% of GDP, where it is now, certainly isn't a sign of a healthy economy...

Are we forgetting the .com bubble which created jobs and propped up the stock market which increased GDP. The housing bubble also helped to prop up the economy. We all know the final outcome of those bubbles. But the worst bubble is yet to pop. That is the debt bubble and then the dollar bubble. And we thought the housing bubble was bad...

[SemiAuto]

We're talking about revenue.

Tax revenue is typically 18-19% of GDP when we have full employment.

Tax revenue at 15-16% of GDP, where it is now, certainly isn't a sign of a healthy economy...

... due to an uncontrolled spending problem. Even if you had 18-19% of GDP in revenue you still have a spending problem because it is running around 24-25% of GDP.

The problem is spending. Taxes got raised and the expected revenue increase for the first year is about to be spent. Raising revenue isn't the solution. Fiscal restraint is badly needed.

[flyboy56]

... due to an uncontrolled spending problem. Even if you had 18-19% of GDP in revenue you still have a spending problem because it is running around 24-25% of GDP.

The problem is spending. Taxes got raised and the expected revenue increase for the first year is about to be spent. Raising revenue isn't the solution. Fiscal restraint is badly needed.

Do you really think the government will cut entitlements? That's what is causing most of our spending problems.

[banner1124]

Do you really think the government will cut entitlements? That's what is causing most of our spending problems.

With all due respect, I'm sick of entitlements taking the blame. DO those programs need some tweaks, yet, but are they what's causing more of our spending problems? Hell no. We spend more on the military than the next 17 industrialized countries combined. We started two wars for no good reason and put them on a credit card. All the while we lowered taxes instead of raising them to pay for our wars. But now all of a sudden folks wanna take a chunk out of the hide of Medicare, Medicaid and SS to fix a problem caused mostly by spending on everything but? Give me a break.

[flyboy56]

With all due respect, I'm sick of entitlements taking the blame. DO those programs need some tweaks, yet, but are they what's causing more of our spending problems? Hell no. We spend more on the military than the next 17 industrialized countries combined. We started two wars for no good reason and put them on a credit card. All the while we lowered taxes instead of raising them to pay for our wars. But now all of a sudden folks wanna take a chunk out of the hide of Medicare, Medicaid and SS to fix a problem caused mostly by spending on everything but? Give me a break.

With all due respect you need to get your head out of your a-double-s! Defense cuts are already in the works. Now how about those entitlements? Are you willing to compromise?

Washington, DC — As another debt-deal deadline looms this winter in Congress, an unusual alliance of lawmakers has joined forces to put the Pentagon budget under greater scrutiny and to end the almost carte blanche status it enjoyed in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In a letter last month to President Barack Obama and congressional leaders, 11 Democratic and 11 Republican lawmakers asked that Defense Department spending be put squarely on the table in the coming clashes over debt reduction.

“We believe that substantial defense savings can be achieved over the long term without compromising national security, through strategic reductions in the Pentagon’s budget,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/14203...or-budget-cuts

[banner1124]

With all due respect you need to get your head out of your a-double-s! Defense cuts are already in the works. Now how about those entitlements? Are you willing to compromise?

Washington, DC — As another debt-deal deadline looms this winter in Congress, an unusual alliance of lawmakers has joined forces to put the Pentagon budget under greater scrutiny and to end the almost carte blanche status it enjoyed in the years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

In a letter last month to President Barack Obama and congressional leaders, 11 Democratic and 11 Republican lawmakers asked that Defense Department spending be put squarely on the table in the coming clashes over debt reduction.

“We believe that substantial defense savings can be achieved over the long term without compromising national security, through strategic reductions in the Pentagon’s budget,” the lawmakers wrote in the letter.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/14203...or-budget-cuts

I'm all for doing something about entitlements, but quit pretending like entitlements are *the* source of the problem. Also, I don't trust republicans one bit on entitlements simply because of the fact that they have been trying to destroy Medicare and SS since their inception... they'e been against them from the start and simply cannot be trusted to have the best interest of those programs at heart now. I'll believe real defense cuts when I see them. Perhaps it's YOU with a head up your arse?

[flyboy56]

I'm all for doing something about entitlements, but quit pretending like entitlements are *the* source of the problem. Also, I don't trust republicans one bit on entitlements simply because of the fact that they have been trying to destroy Medicare and SS since their inception... they'e been against them from the start and simply cannot be trusted to have the best interest of those programs at heart now. I'll believe real defense cuts when I see them. Perhaps it's YOU with a head up your arse?

And perhaps you don't want to be a compromiser? You must be an obstructionist?

[banner1124]

And perhaps you don't want to be a compromiser? You must be an obstructionist?

Perhaps you should quit putting words in my mouth. Don't you ever tire of lying and distorting just for the sake of "winning" an argument?

[flyboy56]

Perhaps you should quit putting words in my mouth. Don't you ever tire of lying and distorting just for the sake of "winning" an argument?

Republicans wanting to destroy Medicare and SS is not distorting the facts? That's just liberal talking points. You are so brainwashed. Reforming is not destroying. Fact: we live much longer. Can the government afford to keep people on retirement for 20 years?