[olefoo]

If it weren't for the fact that there is a simple straightforward known solution to the problem: fixing the revenue side of the equation.

If we reset tax rates to what they were under Bill Clinton the deficit would be falling, not rising...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._president...

Notice when the the numbers start climbing...

Undoing GWB's shenanigans would have us back on the right track tomorrow. But that is apparently an unthinkable concept in the current political climate.

[yummyfajitas]

Both Clinton and Bush barely touched the revenue side of the equation. Revenue was 18.6% during the Clinton era and 18.0% during the Bush era.

Under Clinton, spending was reduced. Bush reversed most of the Clinton era budged decrease.

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/misc/debt-revenue-and-expenditu...

[curt]

Correlation does not mean causation.

What we need to do is go back to the Clinton level of spending. The revenue side isn't the problem. If you look at when the rates were changed, revenues on the upper income individuals actually increased. That's how it's always worked. Harding cuts, Kennedy cuts, Reagan cuts, Clinton cuts all increased revenue in relation to the rates changed.

People need to realize increasing tax rates does not mean increased government revenue, decreasing rates does not mean less revenue. Economies don't work like that due to how capital is deployed.