Skip to comments.Spending cuts tied to loophole closings; paying back the federal debt tied to rate increases?
Posted on 11/29/2012 7:05:10 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
Not saying that I support the second part, but I'm tossing that into the mix just to see what people think...
If 1A (by law) had to precede 1B (1A triggered 1B), with the two inextricably tied together by law - 1A being spending cuts and 1B being the closing of tax loopholes - would Dems go for it?
Secondly, would Dems, banks and the Federal Reserve --- would they be in favor of 2A preceding 2B (the two also being tied together by law):
2A being ongoing payments on the principal (The PRINCIPAL) of the federal debt outstanding and 2B being tax rate increases (2A triggers 2B) whereby the federal debt could start being paid off and go down to $15 trillion, then $14 trillion dollars, etc, over a period of time until it is all finally paid off?
What say you?
That's like me talking about my great weight loss plans while getting thirds at Thanksgiving dinner. Maybe we can cut spending enough to get the deficit until a trillion dollars a year for the first time under Obama before we start talking about paying off the debt.
The point is, are there some that don’t want the principal of the federal debt to EVER be paid off?
Do they want it to keep going higher and higher?
Who would benefit from this, and why?
BTW, we borrow money to pay the interest payments on the debt outstanding.
And I agree: if the budget is never balanced, then we can’t get to making payments on the principal, and thus we stay locked into making interest payments on the total debt outstanding.
And that total debt outstanding keeps going up and up. Period. And thus the interest payments on the debt outstanding keep going up and up, too.
Ride RINOs ride, upon your mystery ship...
“close loopholes” / “raise revenues”= raise taxes.
When it all falls apart, republicans will be blamed.
So why not do the right thing?
yodeling over the fiscal cliff...let’s go!
NOBODY is talking about paying off the debt. The whole hulaballo is about slicing at most 10% off the deficit and maybe a tiny decrease in the rate of spending increases BUT NO spending cuts.
$trillion deficites and growing as far as the eye can see.