The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Politics & Current Events / Political Asylum

URL:  http://boards.fool.com/but-it-takes-a-minimum-of-20-as-revenue-and-30430861.aspx

Subject:  Re: Sequestration again Date:  12/13/2012  5:37 PM
Author:  PuddinHead42 Number:  1844789 of 1972284

But it takes a minimum of 20% as revenue--and therein lies your problem. Thus, you are a part of the problem. You are not proposing a viable solution and you know this to be a fact

But the historical average is about 18.3% for revenues and 20% for spending, so I don't understand why you think that poster is part of the problem and knows that is not a fact.

A lot of people think it is ok to run a small deficit, I think even Buffett. 2% (20% - 18%) is acceptable to many.

All the democrats keep saying how great the Clinton economy was and we should just let the upper brackets go back to those good ole days. Guess what, ALL the rates were higher, that is why it worked. And the spending was lower. Obama does not want ALL the rates higher. You can't move 15% rev to 18% or 20% on the backs of the 2%. Yes they should pay more, but it is not possible to fix the problem just by taking more money from them.

I also did not see you mention what spending cuts you thought would be acceptable to drop spending by at least 2% of GDP to inch back towards historical normals. Please enlighten us.
Copyright 1996-2014 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us