Skip to comments.Coburn: We have to raise taxes in order to pass spending cuts
Posted on 05/19/2011 12:35:34 PM PDT by Minus_The_Bear
Earlier this week, Tom Coburn quit the Gang of Six negotiations in the Senate, saying that the bipartisan working group on the budget wanted to go in a substantially different direction than Coburn would travel. Given that context, Coburns essay in todays Washington Post prompts a question just where exactly did the Gang of Six want to go? Coburn argues in his article that conservatives are going to have to swallow some tax hikes to get the spending cuts they want (via OTB):
Um, no we don’t...
30 Year Old Adult Baby Receiving Social Security
Amazing that people fall for the GOP line of no taxes and smaller government. They lie too.
Having to swallow tax increases is not the same as screaming for them.
This is the same line of BS my ex-congressman (D) gave me about Obamacare... We must spend more to save money.
Read my lips: No new taxes!
Spending cuts now, Tax increases later (never).
Honey, can I have more spending money. I promise I’ll cut my spending if you do./s
You can’t read.
Sorry Tom, we have already fallen for that line of crap. Not again.
I feel like I’m living through Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Who is that imposter and what has he done with the real Tom Coburn?
From the article
“Coburn has done a great job in the Senate and is a serious, responsible conservative.”
Coburn is right...you can’t get the Dem Senate to agree to anytrhing unless you agree to go along with their tax hikes. That’s all he’s saying. Either make a deal or wait til 2012, those are our options.
That’s what they told GHW Bush. And they got part of it right ... taxes went up.
Cut the budget by about a $trillion a year, or get out of Congress.
does this guy still claim to even be a Republican??
How about we trade a one percentage point increase in tax rates for a ten percent cut in spending.
You have no idea what you are talking about, I never advocated for higher taxes. I merely called attention to the fact that you turned “have to swallow” tax increases into “screaming for” tax increases.
Here he is on the floor of Senate. Listen and decide if he’s conservative or not
So, you’ve read the article? Has it been posted? I prefer to wait till I actually see what was written before I listen to mouth-breathers who jump in and trash conservatives.
I have seen no one try to claim that taxes are too low.
Coburn is a fool if he thinks the left will ever allow real spending cuts no matter how many times taxes are hiked
Hint: They are both consuming far too much already and consuming even more is a change in the wrong direction.
F*ck you Coburn!!!
And the same to your Republican cohorts who agree with you.
We are NOT going to pay more in taxes to fund the wasted stimulus and bank fraudster bailouts.
If you and your party votes to raise our taxes, you and your party are DONE!!!!!
We will go third party and give birth to a party that believes in and practices responsibility and is honest, unlike YOU you stinking piece of crap.
He didn’t advocate for higher taxes either. He said we are “going to have to swallow” tax increases to get the spending cuts we want. Because the Dems control the Senate. Our best bet is to use this as a campaign issue in 2012 and forget trying to get the Dems to go along with responsible spending.
Got the Potomac Fever bad, do you Coburn?
The poster of this article is not measuring high on the “reading comprehension” scale. There’s a big difference between “have to swallow tax increases to get the spending cuts we want’ and “screaming and advocating for higher taxes.”
We don’t have to “swallow” anything.
We control the House and control spending.
We control the House and control taxes.
The problem is Republicans want to steal more from people who work to fund people who don’t work.
They are already stealing too much. The answer is NO.
If these clowns keep going this way, they are going to be made to understand that the Tea Parties of 2009 were but a warning. Do the words "alter or abolish" ring a bell?
No I'm not for tax increases. I think Tom Coburn is not essentially for them either. The story is about the legislative impasse, and efforts to break it and pass some legislation to create conditions that will avoid a default on interest due on current U.S. Treasury notes; and its about a divided Congress with neither party a majority in both houses; and the truth about Mr. Coburn's tax preferences is in the details of dealing with that context. He knows that anything that gets passed will involve some compromise by the House majority and some by the Senate majority. That's not a policy preference, that's simply the way it is. I think that's where Coburn is coming from.
The Washington Elite do NOT understand that businesses and people will NOT take tax increases lying down. People will simply adjust their budgets so they do not spend as much and businesses will at the least scale down their business and begin to let people go or at the most, relocate to a more business friendly state. Heck the ONLY business that will thrive is U-Haul or some other moving company!
Coburn must have taken the Pelosi course on passing legislation. He’s no conservative.
Nonsense, Senator. This was the game all along, to make like the eight years of Reagan and the eight years of Bush never existed. They hiked up spending to astronomical levels on purpose so that taxes would have to be raised. They hiked up spending so that Reagan would have to go back on his tax cuts. They hiked up spending so that Bush I would have to raise taxes. Now they’re doing the same thing again. Increase spending so we’ll have to reverse tax cuts and increase taxes.
The government has more than enough revenue and has a ton of waste. The department of energy produces none and obstructs all. Eliminate it. The dept. of Agriculture has two buildings. Eliminate one or both. The dept. of the Interior should be slashed. The dept of Veterans Affairs should be rolled back into defense. Government land should be sold, subsidies cut.
There’s a beginning, Senator. And while you’re at it, sit in the Senate and deny all unanimous consents. There’s spending savings right there.
Static revenue models assume that people do not change their behavior when taxes go up or down. Yet, in spite of countless examples of the fallacy of such assumptions, they somehow still govern our elected representatives’ economic understanding.
No, I’m for abolishing income taxes, and going back to the time when the government was small enough to run from collecting tariffs. But good luck with that.
BTW, I notice you crap all over every Paln thread... Does minus_the_bear mean “get rid of Palin?”
IF THIS IS TRUE... then Coburn is dead to me.
I’ve never thought of Tom Coburn as a scumbag, so I will wait until this is verified/clarified before nailing down such a conclusion.
Governments don't reduce deficits by raising taxes on the people; governments reduce deficits by controlling spending and stimulating new wealth.
-- Ronald Reagan
You seem to have a more basic confusion.
Regardless of whether it is "swallow" (ie., cave like a sissy) or "scream for" more taxes, it's totally unacceptable. Therefore, IF Coburn is saying he would go along ("swallow") ANY tax increases, THEN he is a scumbag.
I will, however, wait for verification/clarification of what Tom said/meant.
How about this... raise taxes on the half of households that don’t pay anything. It is about damn time those freeloaders paid their fair share.
What line of "no taxes"? I see them talk of low taxes, and I'm in favor of that, but the only people benefitting from "no taxes" are the freeloading deadbeats that make up the base of the democrat party.
Somebody has some serious dirt on him is my bet.Just like our boy arnold.