We don't live in a warm and fuzzy world. It's up to you to take care of you. Some people get the raw end of the deal. That's what happens. I don't have to do homework for what enough is. I'll put it at 20%. Everybody pay 20%. EVERYBODY. And tack on a $5 fee for everyone paying taxes, here illegally, or visiting the US to help cover the debt faster. And while you are at it cut the Govt. budget by 50% and don't let them borrow another freaking penny. The people that believe me don't need help. They rely on themselves.
Seventy-five percent of the new revenue pulled in by President Barack Obama's "fiscal cliff" plan would go toward new spending, not toward deficit reduction, http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-tax-hikes-go-toward-new-spending_666067.html We're $16 trillion in debt and this guy wants to spend $1.6 trillion dollars more. Simply astounding.
There is something very bogus about that graph and very suspicious about its source. It just came out to today but the fact-checkers are going to shred it. So 100% of the tax increases go to debt reduction or to new spending? Not a penny to existing programs? The very notion is preposterous. He cites no source that breaks down these figures. This all comes from a republican politician whose explanation of how he came up with that percentage does not hold water.
So if you already had 2 trillion in taxes (just an example) to pay for existing programs and added 1.6 trillion (as is proposed) in new taxes to pay for new items/deficit, how is that preposterous again?
I haven't had a chance to review the graph or its sources, but something in your logic sure doesn't make sense. The1.6 trillion claimed to be to new spending could be going entirely to existing programs, or to new programs and existing ones. New spending does not mean new program. The ARRA funds were new spending that went largely to existing programs like CSBG and WIA.
If you read the bottom line of the graph it says very clearly that the graph was produced by staffers for Republican Senator Jeff Sessions. Further, the only place that would publish that kind of blatant lie is the Weekly Standard.
He hasn't said specifically how the new funds are to be spent. WHO SAYS that $1.6 billion is to be spent on new items and 400 billion on deficit reduction. If The $1.6 trillion pays for annual expenses that don't have to be borrowed, then it is helping reduce deficits and therefore more debt. WHERE is any itemized list of spending? Don't you think you should? They certainly suggest that it is spending on new programs. If the new taxes were spent on the existing budget it would reduce deficit spending by that much. How is that different from the $400 billion said to spent on deficit reduction?
Well, neither has Obama. Anyway, my only point was that its not preposterous to think that majority of the new "revenue" will go to fund new programs, or programs that have expanded beyond the original scope. 100% of the new "revenue" will not go towards the deficit. That much is very clear.
Then, Jeff Sessions just made this all up. He doesn't have a clue. He's has had a lot of trouble with truth-checkers in the past. I see nothing has changed. Go to his website for his amazingly twisted logic . . . LINK Here is how he arrived at his numbers To arrive at the $1.4 trillion spending increase cited by the Budget Committee, one simply has to remove accounting gimmicks from the President’s baseline to arrive at a more realistic estimate of planned spending. Specifically, adjusting OMB’s baseline to account for the inflated estimate of war spending ($800 billion), the cost of the unpaid-for “doc fix” ($400 billion), as well as related interest costs, one arrives at a realistic projection that the United States will spend $44.8 trillion from FY12–23. Thus, the President’s $46.2 trillion spending proposal represents a $1.4 trillion spending increase above a fair current policy baseline.He admits that he ADJUSTED the OMB's baseline figures to manufacture a $1.4 spending increase (He lied about them). And he does state specifically that this bogus $1.4 Trillion figure represents increase in spending over current growth projections. President Obama’s FY 2013 budget proposal has two primary impacts on fiscal policy: a $1.8 trillion increase in taxes and a $1.4 trillion increase in spending above current growth projections—netting less than $400 billion in deficit reduction.
