Deficit Committee tells Obama: cut taxes, stop spending, govt sucks

[Sugar Dick]

Deficit committee suggests cutting personal and corporate income taxes, tells Obama public sector is embarrassingly unproductive, says its evil to write checks your ass can't cash, and to quit spending money like a pirate hooker that just won the powerball

http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/CoChair_Draft.pdf

Wonder if Obama will attempt to "revise" this report.   

[06wildcat]

Deficit committee suggests cutting personal and corporate income taxes, tells Obama public sector is embarrassingly unproductive, says its evil to write checks your ass can't cash, and to quit spending money like a pirate hooker that just won the powerball

http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/CoChair_Draft.pdf

Wonder if Obama will attempt to "revise" this report.   

There's a whole lot of tax-cutting Republicans that would scream bloody murder in the tax plans in there were put in place.

[bubbles4ksu]

They recommend 100b cut from the defense budget. Wonder how that will end up?

[Jeffy]

They recommend 100b cut from the defense budget. Wonder how that will end up?

Privatize the military.... sounds good.

Maintain voluntary national guard for border security.

[Sugar Dick]

Deficit committee suggests cutting personal and corporate income taxes, tells Obama public sector is embarrassingly unproductive, says its evil to write checks your ass can't cash, and to quit spending money like a pirate hooker that just won the powerball

http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/CoChair_Draft.pdf

Wonder if Obama will attempt to "revise" this report.   

There's a whole lot of tax-cutting Republicans that would scream bloody murder in the tax plans in there were put in place.

Yeah, I'm sure it's ONLY the republicans that will scream bloody murder over the suggested tax cuts 

[06wildcat]

Well the term that will really stick out to Republicans are "broaden the tax base" which sounds just fine and dandy doesn't it. It means things like lower nominal income tax rates but the wealthy would most likely end up paying a higher effective tax rate overall. One of the suggestions to "broaden the tax base" would be to tax all dividends as ordinary income.

It's currently not too hard for someone in the 35 percent bracket to pay the feds an effective tax rate in the mid-teens on all income. That effective rate is going to jump much closer to 20 for a lot of those people in the top brackets because to broaden the tax base will mean eliminating a lot of the practices that drive down their current effective rates.

In short, earners currently in the top tax bracket would most likely be better off having the Bush tax cuts expire for them and see their marginal rates return to 39 percent while still receiving a break for qualified dividends among other things.

Of course the last time a huge tax cut was passed by broadening the tax base the self-employed were hit with a 100 percent increase in Social Security taxes.

[Sugar Dick]

No more AMT 

[06wildcat]

No more AMT 

Again, the provisions set forth would eliminate the need for an AMT. If I were incredibly wealthy I'd be raising hell about the proposals the commission has put out there.

There's no way the vast majority of it becomes a reality anyways. No one, Democrat or Republican, gets elected by voting for the long-term good of the country.

[Jeffy]

Funny how the FairTax would solve most of these issues.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

[Sugar Dick]

No more AMT 

Again, the provisions set forth would eliminate the need for an AMT. If I were incredibly wealthy I'd be raising hell about the proposals the commission has put out there.

There's no way the vast majority of it becomes a reality anyways. No one, Democrat or Republican, gets elected by voting for the long-term good of the country.

1031 Exchange   

[michigancat]

this seems like a reasonable step in the right direction. 

[sonofdaxjones]

The Military is already being privatized at an alarming rate.

How do you think this war mongering administration is getting around discussing all the dirty deeds they are up to??

[Rage Against the McKee]

Privatize the military.... sounds good.

Maintain voluntary national guard for border security.

Sounds terrible, actually. How about just use the military for border security and quit funding unnecessary wars overseas?

[Sugar Dick]

Privatize the military.... sounds good.

Maintain voluntary national guard for border security.

Sounds terrible, actually. How about just use the military for border security and quit funding unnecessary wars overseas?

The "unnecessary wars overseas" rhetoric is rapidly becoming as sophomoric and ignorant as the whole "evil corporation" bit.

 

[Jeffy]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

[06wildcat]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

 

[Rage Against the McKee]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

Good luck getting 2/3 of congress to agree on tax policy.

[Jeffy]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

 

Why do you hate the Constitution?

[06wildcat]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

 

Why do you hate the Constitution?

[Sugar Dick]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

Good luck getting 2/3 of congress to agree on tax policy.

google "Sixteenth Amendment"

[AzCat]

Deficit Committee tells Obama: cut taxes, stop spending, govt sucks

No.  What they really said is more along the lines of, "In a country whose federal government has in its recent history spent & received in tax revenues about 17-19% of GDP it would be a really swell idea to lock in a new baseline for federal spending at 21% of GDP.  Hey, at least that's a little less than the 25% Obama's spending now so it must be a really great plan and there can't possibly be any complaints!  Oh and here are some proposed entitlement changes that are political suicide and therefore can never be passed to go along with some military cuts that can.  And there is not a single federal agency that should be eliminated, nor should we touch federal pay & benefits which are presently double those in the private sector and rising far more quickly than those in the private sector.  Obamacare is good, we won't touch it despite the fact that it'll bankrupt private insurers in a few years, explode the budget with subsidies / new healthcare entitlements and in the span of a decade or two completely destroy the US economy.  But we really need to look serious so here're some tax increases that lefties can use to bludgeon righties about the latter not being serious about cutting the deficit / paying down the debt.  Just don't look too closely at who exactly championed the budget busters that are killing us now, no reason to delve into ancient history."  Etc., etc., etc.  This wasn't an effort to address the deft / deficit, it was an effort to permanently enshrine a much higher level of federal spending but that should suprise no one as it was Obama's committee.  

This was a decidedly unserious effort.  Had they been at all serious it would have looked more like this.  For you ADD 'tards:

If spending is simply capped at the current level with a hard freeze, the budget is balanced by 2016. If we limit spending growth to 1 percent each year, the budget is balanced in 2017. And if we allow 2 percent annual spending growth — letting the budget keep pace with inflation, the budget balances in 2020.

[Deez Nutz]

Deficit Committee tells Obama: cut taxes, stop spending, govt sucks

No.  What they really said is more along the lines of, "In a country whose federal government has in its recent history spent & received in tax revenues about 17-19% of GDP it would be a really swell idea to lock in a new baseline for federal spending at 21% of GDP.  Hey, at least that's a little less than the 25% Obama's spending now so it must be a really great plan and there can't possibly be any complaints!  Oh and here are some proposed entitlement changes that are political suicide and therefore can never be passed to go along with some military cuts that can.  And there is not a single federal agency that should be eliminated, nor should we touch federal pay & benefits which are presently double those in the private sector and rising far more quickly than those in the private sector.  Obamacare is good, we won't touch it despite the fact that it'll bankrupt private insurers in a few years, explode the budget with subsidies / new healthcare entitlements and in the span of a decade or two completely destroy the US economy.  But we really need to look serious so here're some tax increases that lefties can use to bludgeon righties about the latter not being serious about cutting the deficit / paying down the debt.  Just don't look too closely at who exactly championed the budget busters that are killing us now, no reason to delve into ancient history."  Etc., etc., etc.  This wasn't an effort to address the deft / deficit, it was an effort to permanently enshrine a much higher level of federal spending but that should suprise no one as it was Obama's committee.  

This was a decidedly unserious effort.  Had they been at all serious it would have looked more like this.  For you ADD 'tards:

If spending is simply capped at the current level with a hard freeze, the budget is balanced by 2016. If we limit spending growth to 1 percent each year, the budget is balanced in 2017. And if we allow 2 percent annual spending growth — letting the budget keep pace with inflation, the budget balances in 2020.

    

[Rage Against the McKee]

I would like to see a VAT with no income tax. The only problem is that we cannot trust the government to not come back with an income tax in the future.

Sure there is.  It's called Constitutional Amendment.  It would require the repeal of the 16th and probably the replacement of it with a FairTax amendment.

I think that's the living-breathing document that libs love to talk about.  The Constitution can be changed any time!

Good luck getting 2/3 of congress to agree on tax policy.

google "Sixteenth Amendment"

Yeah, well apparently the US government worked in 1913. Who would have guessed?