How does DOUBLING everyone's tax sound?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Yep... that's what the Heritage Foundation says will have to happen, in order to maintain the current levels of spending. Not just doubling tax on the rich, but EVERYBODY!

http://www.heritage.org/research/com...ill-go-in-2011

Taxpayers frantically filing their 1040s - as well as anyone following the spending and deficit debate in Washington - may be asking where exactly their tax dollars are going.

Some believe most spending goes to welfare and foreign aid. Others believe defense and corporate welfare dominate the budget. In realty, Social Security and Medicare are the largest programs, and are set to nearly double over the next decade.

Overall, Washington will spend $32,137 per household in 2011 - the highest level in American history (adjusted for inflation). It will collect $18,295 per household in taxes. The remaining $13,841 represents this year's staggering budget deficit per household, which, along with all prior government debt, will be dumped in the laps of our children.

Government spending has increased by $5,000 per household since 2008, and nearly $10,000 per household over the past decade. Yet there is no free lunch: If spending is not reined in, then eventually taxes must also rise by $10,000 per household.

Washington will spend this $32,137 per household as follows (all numbers adjusted for inflation): Social Security/Medicare: $10,458. The 15.3 percent payroll tax, split evenly between the employer and employee, covers most of Social Security's and some of Medicare's costs. This system can remain sustainable only if there are enough workers to support all retirees, which is why it risks collapsing under the weight of 77 million retiring baby boomers. Unless these programs are reformed, paying all promised benefits would eventually require doubling all income tax rates.

[Topspin]

I googled heritage foundation and defense cuts.

My computer exploded

[Onceler]

Gotta be the Heritage to highlight SS & Medicare (which I'm fine w/), but marginalize defense spending...

[Rationalist]

Obviously, we cannot rely on tax increases to balance the budget.

We must, however, rely on a combination of drastic cuts (at least $500 billion), targeted tax increases, and policies that promote economic growth. Denmark has extremely high taxes, but their economy is doing great because they have minimal regulation on business. They also have budget surpluses.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Gotta be the Heritage to highlight SS & Medicare (which I'm fine w/), but marginalize defense spending...

Did they say something that isn't true? Defense spending and foreign aid PALE in comparison to SS & Medicare spending. It is nothing more than a DISTRACTION from the problem, to continue harping on defense and foreign aid, when the problem is solvency of SS and Medicare with the influx of 77 million Baby Boomers. Are you getting any of this, pinhead? Probably not, because Heritage Foundation said it, so you immediately tuned it out.

[Topspin]

No serious discussion can be had without drastic defense cuts being included pinhead cousin marrier.

[Rationalist]

Dixie, this country spends almost a trillion dollars on "defense." Surely, there are areas that could be cut.

My girlfriend's dad is in the army. He is responsible for his department's budget, and says it is absurd how much money they are forced to waste. I say "forced" because if they don't spend it, they lose it in the next budget cycle.

I guarantee we could cut $200 billion and they wouldn't even feel it.

[Onceler]

Did they say something that isn't true? Defense spending and foreign aid PALE in comparison to SS & Medicare spending. It is nothing more than a DISTRACTION from the problem, to continue harping on defense and foreign aid, when the problem is solvency of SS and Medicare with the influx of 77 million Baby Boomers. Are you getting any of this, pinhead? Probably not, because Heritage Foundation said it, so you immediately tuned it out.

To say defense spending pales in comparison is ridiculous. Defense spending is one of the 3 big pieces of the pie.

I love how you righties are all serious about cuts until it comes to defense; we're still working a cold war budget, that can be reduced by a third at minimum. Economic strength will be the foundation for the next superpower, not military might.

You wanna get stuff cut? You have to show some good faith. You can't just cut "their" stuff....

[Cancel 2016.2]

Spending should be taken back to 2006 levels. There is NO reason we need to keep spending at the pace we are. NONE.

There is waste in virtually every department within the federal government. We absolutely need to cut spending. We also will need to raise tax revenues. Obviously you all know my position on the tax side (flat tax w/standard deduction). Defense and education have vast amounts of waste on the Admin side. Defense also has a lot of waste in 'killer robot' type projects that we simply don't need.... when the head of defense says 'we don't need 'x'' and the idiots in DC STILL push through funding for project 'x'.... we have a problem.

Too much of the over spending is because the standard response is 'if you cut 'x'.... jobs will be lost'. Yes, we are going to have to restructure how things are done. Yes, jobs are going to be lost in some areas where waste is found. Maintaining the status quo due to 'jobs' is moronic at best as it keeps us in a situation where we will never make cuts and will instead continue pushing the funding problem further into the future until the point that it implodes on the country in a very violent manner. Time to tighten the belts folks. Time to get the fiscal house in order. It has been a half a century since we last lowered our nations debt in a fiscal year. A HALF A CENTURY.... let that sink in.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, this country spends almost a trillion dollars on "defense." Surely, there are areas that could be cut.

My girlfriend's dad is in the army. He is responsible for his department's budget, and says it is absurd how much money they are forced to waste. I say "forced" because if they don't spend it, they lose it in the next budget cycle.

I guarantee we could cut $200 billion and they wouldn't even feel it.

I agree there is lots of waste, but this is true throughout government. And I also agree, we need to look at every area where we can cut waste and trim costs... that being said, what Heritage points out is still true... the #1 thing driving our debt is the cost of SS and Medicare, because of the influx of 77 million Baby Boomers. The cost of defense is going to remain relatively the same year after year, it isn't going to dramatically and suddenly rise, unless we get involved in a World War or something. SS and Medicare IS going to rise, dramatically and rapidly, as these 77 million retirees enter the equation. There is no way to avoid that, it's coming whether we like it or not. Democrats propose we do nothing, just keep borrowing to pay the shortfalls, but that doesn't work in the real world. In order to pay for what is currently on the table, our tax rates will necessarily have to DOUBLE across the board. Not just on the rich, but on everyone! And those who currently pay no tax, will soon have to pick up the slack and start paying as well. This is what we are headed for, if we don't reform the system now. Cutting defense waste is all good and well, but it won't fix this problem, which is the REAL problem with our spiraling debt.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Let's put the Obama Administration spending into perspective here, okay?

When he took office, we were roughly $9 trillion in debt. We are now $14 trillion in debt and he wants to extend our debt limit another $2.6 trillion! This means, when Obama (hopefully) leaves office in 2012, we will have a $17 trillion national debt. Think about that a moment... It took us 232 years to amass a $9 trillion debt, and in 4 years, we will have almost DOUBLED it! Obama is responsible for more debt than all previous presidents COMBINED! Not just the worst debt of any president, but worse than ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER!

[Onceler]

Let's put the Obama Administration spending into perspective here, okay?

When he took office, we were roughly $9 trillion in debt. We are now $14 trillion in debt and he wants to extend our debt limit another $2.6 trillion! This means, when Obama (hopefully) leaves office in 2012, we will have a $17 trillion national debt. Think about that a moment... It took us 232 years to amass a $9 trillion debt, and in 4 years, we will have almost DOUBLED it! Obama is responsible for more debt than all previous presidents COMBINED! Not just the worst debt of any president, but worse than ALL OF THEM PUT TOGETHER!

You don't always have to lie, but you tend to. When Bush left office, the debt was 10.7 trillion, not 9 trillion. And Bush almost doubled it during his time.

[Topspin]

expecting dixie not to lie is like saying Tressel is clean

[Cancel 2018. 3]

i say we double only registered democrats taxes

[Topspin]

I say we double taxes on slow ambulance chasing dorks