Quote:
Originally Posted by Riot
Taxes are at historic lows.
Okay: Say it costs $1000 a month to pay your mortgage. If you quit your job that pays you $2000 a month, and take a job that only pays $1100 a month (i.e. "the Bush tax cuts"), "cutting spending" isn't your problem, nor will it help you survive.
Who are you referring to as "dead beats" and "leeches"?
|
Historic lows? Compared to whom? Carter??
Your mortgage example is not a good fit. IF ONLY it was a fixed rate percentage on a bounded sum that is actually being repaid. That is not what the national debt is and you know it. The deficit each year is the difference between the tax revenue and the Fantasyland budgets of Washington DC. They haven't paid back dime ONE. It just keeps accumulating. When was the last year that the actual amount OWED went DOWN? Not a reduction in the deficit of a given year versus the deficit of the year before - I mean actual repayment of part of the principal of the loan. I believe it was 1969. Even Clinton's "surplus" did not count Social Security, though even I will admit that compared to what we have seen since in both Obama and Bush, Clinton's spending for those years would be a welcome step in the right direction.
Dead beats, or leeches, are exactly what they sound like: those who consume "the goodies" without contributing in the form of income tax. 49.5% of the population of adults of working age fall into this category. They file a return - but when all the math is added up, they owe $0 or even get money "back" from taxes they didn't pay in the first place.