Balancing the budget is just 6 pennies on the dollar away

"There is no free lunch. You can't have free college"somebody has to pay for it. There's no money up here," Paul said during a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday. "They're not giving you somebody else's money. They're not even taxing the rich. They're just borrowing it."

#1 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2024-09-26 10:51 AM | Reply

The federal budget is so massive that total confiscation of all billionaire's wealth would pay for less than a year, once. A small 6% cut creates a balanced budget.

That's a lot better than the wild sales tax -------- Trump is throwing around now.

#2 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2024-09-26 10:53 AM | Reply

Lumpers will see this as the US just needs to tax 7 more percent.

#3 | Posted by oneironaut at 2024-09-26 11:06 AM | Reply

A small 6% cut creates a balanced budget.

This has probably been known for years, but neither side wants to cut anything.

So non-linear we go!

#4 | Posted by oneironaut at 2024-09-26 11:07 AM | Reply

"They're not giving you somebody else's money. They're not even taxing the rich. They're just borrowing it."

This is false, they are giving you somebody's money that hasn't been born.

#5 | Posted by oneironaut at 2024-09-26 11:07 AM | Reply

Ayn Rand Paul should stick to drilling teeth.

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2024-09-26 04:33 PM | Reply

Pentagon audit results would be significant enough to not perform. Obviously, nothing will significantly or fundamentally change under a Harris administration.

#7 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2024-09-27 02:29 PM | Reply

__________
www.nbcnews.com - Harris calls Trump's tariff proposals a 'sales tax on the American people' | Harris also said if elected she would raise taxes on corporations: "It's about paying their fair share" - NBC, September 26, 2024

|------- President Joe Biden has also backed certain tariffs and done little to roll back ones Trump put into place while president, but Harris emphasized that tariffs should not be implemented across all imports...

Harris also said in the interview that corporate taxes would have to be raised to fund some of her policies tackling affordability for child care and housing. "We're going to have to raise corporate taxes. We're going to have to make sure that the biggest corporations and billionaires pay their fair share. That's just it. It's about paying their fair share." ...
-------|

Tariffs have historically been associated with Democratic / Big Labor favorite populist "protectionist" policies - Trump stole it in 2016 campaign and got a "fair share" of union rank-and-file votes.

That's just one reason Biden did nothing to roll them back - which he could do by "stroke of the pen, law of the land" - and has been piling more, "targeted" (of course!) tariffs on top of already damaging and inflationary Trump's "sales tax," which would be, obviously, "paid by China, Mexico..." or other "villain du jour," IOW, by "somebody else" - never mind the "trickle down" affect of [sales] taxes.

|------- Trump threatens '200% tariff' if John Deere moves production to Mexico.
Trump, who has made tariffs a key of his economic policy, said at policy roundtable in Smithton, Pennsylvania:

"They've announced a few days ago that they're going to move a lot of their manufacturing business to Mexico. I'm just notifying John Deere right now: If you do that, we're putting a 200% tariff on everything that you want to sell into the United States." **
-------|

www.nbcnews.com - The politics of tariffs are complicated. A Democrat just introduced a bill to make Trump's proposals law - - NBC, September 27, 2024

|------- Kamala Harris has slammed Trump's across-the-board tariffs as a "sales tax" on working families, but one Democrat says they would help revive U.S. manufacturing.

Former President Donald Trump calls himself a "tariff man" and says the taxes on imported goods "are the greatest thing ever invented," so it's no surprise Vice President Kamala Harris has attacked the centerpiece of the GOP nominee's economic agenda as bad policy.

What's more surprising, however, is that one House Democrat just introduced a bill to codify Trump's 10% across-the-board tariffs, revealing how the long-dormant trade policy splits both parties. ...

[Tariffs] largely fell out of favor during the late 20th century as the U.S. led a global free trade revolution.

Knocking down trade barriers slashed the cost of consumer goods and grew many economies around the world. But critics say unfettered free trade also decimated American manufacturing and the well-paid, often unionized, jobs that came with it since domestic factories were unable to compete with the lower costs of making things abroad. ...
-------|

In economics it's called "pricing oneself out of the market" and is well understood at any level of management.

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

"If you always do what you've always done, you will always get what you've always got."
__________

#8 | Posted by CutiePie at 2024-09-27 05:35 PM | Reply

__________
** Deere has clarified that they have had manufacturing in Mexico since 1952 and only 4% of its products are "Made in Mexico" - 75% of all sales in the US are made in the US.
__________

#9 | Posted by CutiePie at 2024-09-27 05:36 PM | Reply

The US needs to implement a VAT. If not that, then at least follow the lead of European countries.

I half-jokingly say that the US is the last Marxist country on earth, as the tax policy is based on "to each according to need, to each according to ability." And progressives seem to want to cut taxes for lower-income earners even more. How do you cut taxes for people who don't pay taxes?

#10 | Posted by madbomber at 2024-09-28 02:45 PM | Reply

" How do you cut taxes for people who don't pay taxes?"

Well, the first thing you could do is retire that lie.

Payroll taxes, Ad Valorem taxes, and Excise taxes are all federal taxes, paid by virtually everyone.

Historically, government largess was outside the 1040. No more. Instead, there are a half-dozen child rearing subsidies, all now integrated into the tax system.

Folks who pay income taxes, but get a child tax credit STILL PAID INCOME TAXES. Same with folks who didn't get their stimulus checks until filing. They used to be counted as taxpayers. That year, they weren't.

Oh ... and it was all done for the talking point. Republicans would add a transfer payment onto the 1040 on a Tuesday, then complain "less people are paying taxes" on Wednesday.

Your conclusion is based on GIGO.

#11 | Posted by Danforth at 2024-09-28 03:19 PM | Reply

#10

No need to underline the fact you're an ignorant dumbass.

#12 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2024-09-28 05:38 PM | Reply

__________
Sen. Rand Paul (R"Ky.) asked the Senate on Wednesday to balance the federal budget by trimming a few pennies from every dollar that the government spends.

Not a fan of Rand Paul (or his father Ron Paul) but he is actually correct here, while most people, and especially politicians, miss the most important point - the deficits (as they are, by definition) have to do only with the spending being higher than revenues (which can be anticipated). Tinkering with tax code trying to boost revenue, in and of itself, without substantially raising inflation, and therefore expenses, simply doesn't work.

Politicians (aka "influencers") are putting undue emphasis on taxes / revenues, and convinced themselves and most of their "followers" that if only we would tax this or tax more of that, or "tax the rich (their fair share)" or tax "big corporations" more or come up with a new / another / better tax scheme, be it additional brackets or excise taxes / sales taxes / tariffs / VATs or replacing income tax with something or other... then we would significantly reduce or stop having deficits.

The problem with this [political] "magical thinking" is that it's missing the point - many different brackets and different (higher or lower) marginal taxes resulted in about the same total median federal revenue of 17% of GDP (ATR of 16% - 18%, except very rare extreme cases of deep recessions or extremely high stock markets) - deficits are the result of excessive spending, not "inadequate" revenue / taxation and/or compliance. (see drudge.com)

The "stupid accounting tricks" of CBO (and, often, OMB) using "static / linear" annual budget estimates just ignore these facts and count higher/lower marginal tax rates as if they ever were actual increases/decreases in revenues collected (i.e., "... to 'pay' for this/that"), despite being widely off the mark in their estimate for decades.

Yep, it's actually that easy.

Conceptually and mathematically, yes; politically, no.

Both Congresscritters and Presidents love to boast of "bringing home the bacon/pork" for state/local projects and "record investment" [spending] programs and "moonshots", like "infrastructure" or "manufacturing" or "clean energy" etc., with fancy names that don't actually reflect or accomplish much of what they supposedly expected to do... and that's not even including all the "emergency" and other "off-budget" funding. "Pork" and "horse-trading" and cultivating ties with "rich and powerful" for campaign finance and post-government careers in private/private-public sector seem to be the only fun parts of their job.
__________

#13 | Posted by CutiePie at 2024-09-29 09:38 AM | Reply