Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!reader5.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: suzeeq Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Extending Trump Tax Cuts Would Add $4.6 Trillion to Deficit: CBO Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 08:17:02 -0700 Message-ID: References: <6642836f$0$6559$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <66428aac$0$2363145$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 14 May 2024 15:17:03 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: solani.org; logging-data="310130"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@news.solani.org" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1 Cancel-Lock: sha1:AiD8m4iHoM3JtO2g/OABhVTn144= In-Reply-To: X-User-ID: eJwVyskRACEIBMCU1gUGCUeOyT8Ey363CRbKFQY1GkOFwf9spEyjwzhJYW7/fJ1hl7u+0VGtcwExvBJE Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 5393 Lines: 98 On 5/14/2024 8:12 AM, Yak wrote: > On 5/14/2024 11:02 AM, Baxter wrote: >> Yak wrote in news:v1vml7$5qr6$2@dont-email.me: >> >>> On 5/13/2024 6:52 PM, Baxter wrote: >>>> Skeeter wrote in >>>> news:66428aac$0$2363145$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com: >>>> >>>>> In article <6642836f$0$6559$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>, "Charlie >>>>> Glock"@localhost.com says... >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2024-05-13, Scout >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Yak" wrote in message >>>>>>> news:v1o9ok$24n0i$1@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>> On 5/11/2024 8:05 AM, Scout wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Ford Prefect" wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:v1m2r4$1hjhg$3@dont-email.me... >>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2024 5:02 PM, spaminator wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Ford Prefect wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This one again? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Let's assume what the CBO says is correct (you can't because >>>>>>>>>>>> it doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>> account for the increased tax receipts that occur under tax >>>>>>>>>>>> cuts), the IRS would have collected $4.6 billion per year >>>>>>>>>>>> (4.6B/year * 10 years = 4.6T). >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> ROFL. Your arithmetic skills are broke. Back to 3rd grade for >>>>>>>>>>> you. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> What's broke? Or were you educated at a public school? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 4.6B/year * 10 years = 46B >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On the other hand, lets point out that difference is irrelevant >>>>>>>>> given the sort of deficits the government is, has, and will >>>>>>>>> continue to produce. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We need to eliminate the power of government to add or increase >>>>>>>>> any taxes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> They get 15% of the GDP (federal, state and local) and they have >>>>>>>>> to live within their means like everyone else. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Currently that would allow all levels of government to spend >>>>>>>>> $3.81 Trillion. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Another 5% would be applied directly to paying down the existing >>>>>>>>> state and national debts (and would not apply to new debt) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The FIRST budgetary item would be to pay the interest on any new >>>>>>>>> debt and paying off 5% of the principle of such debt. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The Secondary budget item would be to service of any bonds sold >>>>>>>>> to the public to finance large government projects. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The FINAL budget item would be pay for the elected officials. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In short, if the government is going into debt.. they don't get >>>>>>>>> paid. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Further they are prohibited from having any other sources of >>>>>>>>> income. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let's take it even another step further. According to the CBO the >>>>>>>> total deficts from the beginning of the Trump tax cuts, and >>>>>>>> extending them through 2033, is about $31 trillion. Subtract the >>>>>>>> $4.6 trillion Trump tax cuts and you still have $26.4 trillion. Am >>>>>>>> I supposed to feel better about this? Especially considering, as >>>>>>>> Ford correctly noted, even if the govt collected it they would >>>>>>>> spend it anyway. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As I said limit government spending to a percentage of the GDP. If >>>>>>> officials exceed those limits there are consequences. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Both parties spend like drunken sailors and it needs to stop. My >>>>>> issue is more of a what are they spending my tax dollars on? Are >>>>>> these bills productive or are millions of dollars set aside to study >>>>>> how chickens mate? >>>> >>>> In the 50's and 60's we taxed the rich to pay for out spending.  We >> can >>>> do it again.. >>> >>> The rich are already taxed. >>> >> Many of the rich don't pay any taxes. > > Many of the non-rich don't either. > Yeah, because they don't make enough money to owe taxes.