Originally Posted by ijusluvit

What is frustrating about this position and the regular socialist/communist labeling, is that you ignore the repeated requests to answer whether ANY revenue producing legislation is justifiable. We are not talking about changing the government, We are not talking about "eating the rich" and giving it all away as handouts to 'deadbeats'. What is being asked is whether the Republican position of no new revenue is realistic.

Don't know what you're talking about. I've never refused to answer "repeated requests" (repeated?) about revenue.

The only "revenue enhancement" you want to discuss is "new taxes". The revenue enhancement that's more beneficial is from "new taxpayers". You get new taxpayers by creating incentives for, and removing roadblocks to "business". This is done by "reducing corporate taxes in a manner of certainty", and eliminating regulations that strangle growth.

The resulting economic boom will create all the new revenue you're asking for.

There you go; you've gotten my answer. (even if I didn't know you were waiting for it)

The only "revenue enhancement" you want to discuss is "new taxes". The revenue enhancement that's more beneficial is from "new taxpayers". You get new taxpayers by creating incentives for, and removing roadblocks to "business". This is done by "reducing corporate taxes in a manner of certainty", and eliminating regulations that strangle growth.

X2, what he said

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

Right on, let's cut the defense budget and leave the handouts alone. Then you might want to start learning a foreign language, say, Chinees perhaps. Nay, let's cut the handouts out first, then start trimming the defense. Might just be a better way to start.

Cutting 10% of the defense budget means saving about $70B in one fell swoop. Do you have any idea of how many other programs you'd have to eliminate entirely to get that kind of payback?

That's not to say that those other agencies should be immune from the knife - quite the contrary.

But the bottom line shows that we could have saved a trillion dollars by not going into Iraq - and who knows how Afghanistan would have gone if we weren't distracted by handing Iraq to the Iranians.

I can tell you from personal experience how SOME military agencies are anticipating what's coming. We're not filling open positions so that we can cut those depending on how much budget slashing we're asked to do (I work for the Air Force). That way we can cut the budget without people losing their jobs. It does make OUR jobs a little harder since we're having to do more with less and I see the stress that's putting on some of my co-workers. That being said, I rather like this job even though I could be making more if I wanted to sacrifice more.