It was a good exercise and helped me understand more about all the parts in the equation. I will figure out a way so that other people can play with the variables to see how increases in tax revenues and cutting spending effects the deficit.
Bottom line, increased business tax revenue does not solve the problem. Prior to doing the math, I thought it would, but it doesn't. What caused the problem is job losses, what can solve the problem is more jobs.
Now, tax revenues will help save programs, and it is absolutely true that if we'd had 10 years of pre-Bush tax revenues we wouldn't be in this mess, but increased tax revenues from business does not provide enough revenue to fund all the programs we need funded. It just doesn't.
Jobs will.
Okay, cutting spending does nothing to solve the problem either. Because cutting spending equals more job losses which means more deficits which is the exact opposite of deficit reduction. (Not that I think deficit reduction a critical goal, because I don't, it just looked like y'all were worried about so I thought I would fix it for you, if I could.)
Now I can also see why Republicans want so badly to get into the Social Security lockbox. It is fully funded through 2037, and the revenue stream is completely separate from other revenues, so that moving money from it, or adding money to it, is EXACTLY like your great aunt dying and leaving you a fortune. Except, in this case, Republican want to make great aunt Agatha work five more years and then push her down the stairs so they can pocket more of her salary and prevent her from spending a cent of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment