“tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 that were not paid for.”
While there is some truth to what he points too, the last is nonsense unless you believe the government has first claim to your earnings. Those arenâ€™t tax cuts, theyâ€™re tax rates. Theyâ€™ve been in place for almost 10 years for the first and eight for the second. Tax rates are changed all the time, but until recently theyâ€™ve never been referred too as â€œtax cuts â€¦ that were not paid forâ€.
Exactly. Many of us have been trying to get this across, but it’s difficult in the face of the non-stop hack propaganda on the issue emanating from the MSM.
The idea that “tax cuts need to be paid for” implies that there is some level at which government spending must remain forever. Completely ignored is the notion that tax cuts may influence spending by forcing it lower, which I guess is understandable on the left, because, for them, spending can and must only go in one direction – up. Spending cuts never enter their ideological equations. What Obama wants to do now is raise the long established tax rate in order to pay for out-of-control spending that, as a good leftist, he believes should never, ever go down. For him, it is barely tolerable to cut the rate of increase in spending, but never to actually cut spending year over year.
This seems hard for a lot of people to grasp. so let me put it in the simplest possible terms. If you spend $100 this year, and plan to increase that by ten percent every year thereafter, you will be planning to spend $110 next year. If you cut that spending for next year to $105 from the planned $110, that is not an actual spending cut. You will still spend $105 next year, an increase in spending of $5 over this year’s spending.
A real spending cut would have you spend $100 this year, and $95 next year, which would be a spending cut of $5.
None of the proposals so far put forward by either the GOP or the Democrats have involved actual overall cuts to federal spending. Not even close. The simplest way to verify this is to look at the budgets for each year. Did overall spending go up each year? Then there were no cuts.
Another way to apply a reality check is to look at the national debt: Did it go down from one year to the next? If not, there was no real cut in spending. Interestingly enough, regarding the supposed “budget surpluses” of the Clinton years, the national debt went up in every single year of Clinton’s presidency.