As I stated elsewhere when this speech was mentioned, I'm looking forward to hearing specifics.
I have heard a variation of the 1% solution that seemed interesting. It goes something like this:
- 1% cut of spending across the board. Everything. None of this "critical spending" business. And every year (or 2 years), cut another 1%.
- 1% income tax increases, every year (or 2 years) combined with 1% cut of tax credits. That means if you have a 100% tax credit for something, you can only take 99% of the credit.
The guy postulating it (not a CPA, but a guy that makes sense in a bunch of other areas) said that by the end of a 1st term, we would actually see results, and perhaps ingrain the idea of balancing the budget.
Seemed like a good starting point.
Then we won't make it.Cuts only. I'm taxed enough already. The place where cuts can most make a sizeable difference is entitlements.
Then we won't make it.
When it comes to income tax increases, I'm caught between being pissed that .gov let us get to this point and pissed that I'd have to pay more taxes. Where I (usually) net out is that our generation has to start the process to get it under control. A 1% tax increase isn't going to hurt anyone - even the poor.
Kinda like sequestration, though, it is kinda all or nothing. A 1% cut - including spending on entitlements - has to be part of the solution.
But, I'll also concede that I haven't really done the math. The other guy said he did. Even if the math isn't perfect, it is at least a start.
hahaA 100% cut in entitlements would probably go further than a 1% increase in income tax.
Perhaps this deserves its own thread, at least until Trump comes out with his speech.
A 100% cut in entitlements would probably go further than a 1% increase in income tax.
This would be a positive development.Ooh, looks like The Donald is getting better at not letting crowd infiltrators bait him.
Hmmm... someone's been giving him good advice, lately, and - suhprize suhprize - he seems to be taking it.Trump lays out plan to switch US over to 3 tax brackets of 12%, 25%, 33%, in line with House GOP
Trump down 50-37 in new Monmouth poll due to white women with college degrees: Romney won them by 6 point margin. Trump is losing them by 30.
Surely they aren't all "vote for lady parts"
Monmouth University
haha
Well, in terms of spending, sure.
But, as a matter of practicalities and policy, eliminating them would not be a good idea.
Perhaps this deserves its own thread, at least until Trump comes out with his speech.
Maybe but it won't cover the cost of the resulting civil unrest.
Well, they may be looking to Johnson for ... well... you know.
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Trump down 50-37 in new Monmouth poll due to white women with college degrees: Romney won them by 6 point margin. Trump is losing them by 30.
Surely they aren't all "vote for lady parts"
Monmouth University