You post an article that uses one line out of a 14 minute interview and think you are posting facts?
Why didn't you post the transcript of the entire article? Why didn't your Briebart folks post a link to the transcript?
Is it because the transcript puts the quote into context? A context that doesn't fit the propaganda agenda of the article???
No, I've seen the show and read it. It does put in a nutshell what she and others believe or at least, try to propose - that more taxes can do most of the work. And the truth is, outright confiscation of all the wealth of the richest Americans won't even come close to closing the gap.
She quickly resorts to a little legerdemain regarding spending cuts - how can anyone realistically refer to anything called a spending cuts which results in huge increases in the yearly deficit?
Here's the thing - we've reached a point in our taxation of the economy in a similar vein to where our industry affects the environment - we can't keep taxing the economy at greater rates, and not adversely affect its performance. We all hear about how the economy is rebounding, but it still hasn't managed to return federal revenues equal to 2007. You know, when all those tax cuts were in force. I'm not advocating cuts, I'm saying that what we're doing now isn't generating the kind of economy that will deliver that kind of federal revenue. Because it's killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
She doesn't get it. And I think you realize it. Despite dismissals of the argument, the comparison to a household budget demonstrates it simply - when you're running a monthly deficit, you DO have a spending problem, not an earning problem and not a "deficit" problem. Deficits are caused by exactly two things - too much money going out and not enough money going in. We've nearly reached the point of diminishing returns when it comes to taxation - you can tax more, but you won't get more. That leaves spending, and nothing they've proposed resembles real cuts.