|
|
|
|
|
|
by yummyfajitas
5343 days ago
|
|
|
Tarp money was mostly paid back. The Fannie/Freddie bailout was not and is unlikely ever to be. The funds weren't obtained from "new taxes levied on employed, middle class, non-drinkers who have never set foot in Heidi’s bar." There has been no increase in federal income taxes since Obama took office. The funds were obtained on credit. Most people believe the only way the US can pay down this debt is to raise taxes. (I disagree, spending can also be cut. But neither major party is unwilling to cut spending - look what happened the last time they claimed they would cut spending: http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/08/de... ) |
|
|
The likely situation is that the US will pay down its debt through a combination of spending cuts and tax hikes. But there is no doubt that the tax hikes will be substantial.
I believe we're in a pretty poisonous political environment, where the dominant strategy for a politician seems to be to convince your constituents that they're being taken advantage of. Most people who benefit from government programs don't realize it (see http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/11/keep-your-gover...), and most voters have an incredibly skewed view of what, exactly, the government spends money on. When polled, voters oppose cuts to almost every major program.
That the median voter has largely incoherent views on the budget, but is very angry about it, leads us right into our current mess.
To my original point: OP's argument is big on righteous indignation, along with a narrative that allows him to cast himself as a "good guy" and short on actual facts to how to dig our way out of this mess.