It’s quite simple:
1 Like
I would be for the paring of spending cuts with tax increases. I would also be for a Federal balanced budget…something required in the majority of states already.
We often hear that spending cuts will be paired with tax increases. Unfortunately, the tax increases happen, and the spending cuts do not.
Prior to 1913, the country did not have a federal income tax. The federal income tax does more to try to change behavior than it does to funding operations of the government.
I agree that we need to balance the federal budget.
1 Like
The last time that happened was in the 1990s during Bill Clinton’s presidency, that was preceded by a tripling of the national debt during Reagan’s “trickle-down economics” experiment.
Yet tax revenue was 19% higher at the end of Reagan’s terms. The more we get our hands on the more we spend.
1 Like
…and yet Obama added 4x the amount of debt as Reagan…in the same 8 year window. What will your excuse be for that ?
Let’s look at the facts, (from investopedia.com)…
You posted a chart about inflation rate when we were talking about national debt ?!?!?! Stay on point.
1 Like
Oops, got distracted… here’s the correct chart. And… it looks like it’s the other way around. Reagan added 2 1/2 times what Obama added, (160% vs 64%.) And, you didn’t allow for inflation. A 1981 Reagan-era dollar was equal to $2.34 in Obama’s term as POTUS.
I was using raw dollars, which is a 4x increase. Even adjusting for inflation it would be more than 2x increase. When you are starting from a substantially larger base…of course the % will be smaller…at least it better be. $1 on $1 is 100%, but 1$ on $25 is 4%. Just basic math.
That’s a problem if you are trying to make comparisons that mean anything. It’s the same as comparing apples to coconuts. 
My first house in 1968 cost $19,000. The house I bought in 2012 cost $550,000.
That doesn’t reflect a 30x increase in any meaningful way. It means the cost of the house I bought in 2012 was almost four and a half times the cost of the 1968 house. (($550,000/($19,000*6.6)) = 4.39
but, but, numbers are so cruel! we want feelings!
For someone with so much money, I catagorically disagree with him. In fact, I’d go so far as to call him either an idiot or a liar.
All of us that manage the household budget know about spending and income. When our budget does not balance, we have to do one or two things, possibly both: spend less, make more. This is just common sense. But, when it comes to the federal budget:
- They aren’t spending their money, they are spending ours.
- If they need more money, they have guns.
Big darn difference. We do NOT have a tax problem, we have a spending problem. How about the 50% of the voting population that pay no income tax toss in 10%? There’s a lot more of the than million dollar households. This is nothing but stupid socialism trying to hoodwink the middle class. If we don’t get spending under control, the rich will move elsewhere, and we will live in a failed nation.
What an article.
I’d like that chart cross referenced by who was controlling the house and senate. Bill Clinton was held to fiscal responsibility, and he was a pragmatic democrat unlike the last round of idiots.
It’s a spending problem. But of course numbers hurt feelings.
WE elected them to office.
For GW’s term:
HOUSE of REPRESENTATIVES-
Republican Control 2001-2006
Democrat Control 2007-2008.
SENATE-
Republican Control Jan-June 2001
Democrat Control July 2001-December 2002
Republican Control Jan- 2003- Dec. 2006
Democrat Control January 2007-2008
For Obama:
During the 113th US Congress the Senate had a Democratic majority, while the House had a Republican majority; such a split would not be repeated until the 118th Congress. This was the last time Democrats held control of the Senate until the 117th Congress in 2021.
I agree. I don’t see eye to eye with my Congressman. Again, it’s a spending problem.
1 Like
They don’t need guns, they have a printing press.
Do you see our government as your enemy?
Dimon is talking about the beliefs and ideas of someone much wealthier than himself, Warren Buffet. Do you hold the same opinion about him?