printTreasury Secretary Tim Geithner told FoxNews anchor Chris Wallace repeatedly that to avoid the debt precipice, “tax reform that would generate revenue” [“now there’s a nice word for taxes”] must be considered. The “revenue we’re going to get through tax reform”: that’s how Geithner put it second time around, during the Sunday interview.
Let us assume, for a moment (as Secretary Geithner expects us to), that the solution to the debt is paying the people who incurred the debt more money; that the solution to the debt is seizing private property (through taxes) and placing it in communal ownership (state bureaucracies), where resources are never allocated efficiently and are always squandered.
Assuming all the above, do you have any guarantees that the money stuffed down the maw of the Federal Frankenstein will actually go to pay down the debt? Of course you don’t. Of course it won’t.
Money extracted from us by the Feds is fungible. Any additional revenues the Feds receive via taxes they will use to plunge private property owners deeper into debt.
UPDATE (July 25): The notion that not raising the debt-ceiling must necessarily result in the US defaulting on its debt is nonsensical. In so asserting, Tiny Tim is talking tripe. The US Treasury takes in enough loot to pay down the interest on the debt as well as a portion of the principal.
Meanwhile Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was upbeat about the US’s economic prospects. In a speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Hong Kong, Clinton framed “the political wrangling in Washington” over the debt as a function of America’s “open and democratic society.”
Clever. I noticed that CNN, in its reporting today, had taken the same tack: Markets across the world were worried over political wrangling in the US, rather than the debt. It was essential for the Demopublicans to arrive at an agreement for markets’ sake. The fact that there is no money in the coffers: that’s of no concern. Why, the awful Gloria Borges, a banal mind if ever there was one, ventured that legislation ought to be passed to automate the raising of the debt ceiling so that “We don’t have to go through this again.”
OMG! Perhaps Timmy has come upon the same solution that Hillary deduced a few years ago, namely, a LOCK BOX! He’ll set-up Lock Boxes for each possible expenditure and he’ll certify that the monies in each will ONLY be applied for the previously designated purpose. MARVELOUS!
P.S. Why don’t all the politicians just make voluntary contributions towards reducing the debt…just write a check every week and mail it in to Treasury?
Spend on this, spend on that , spend on everything. Hire tens of thousands of new federal employees. Raise taxes. I have heard of tax plans that charge us for the miles driven by out vehicles. The next thing you know we’ll be charged each time we flush the john. Tax reform my left buttock. When are we going to stop being fleeced by transparently corrupt and not too smart politicians. I guess we aint so smart either.
At this point I would say that the debt unmanageable. Even if balancing the load more equitably based on the ability pay, more taxes alone would never resolve it. Spending cuts would have to be so deep it would necessitate the USA giving up its superpower status and returning to pre-WW2 force levels. No USA politician would brave such a decline in world prestige. The solution as I see it is bankruptcy. The investors in US debt made a bad decision and continued to throw good money after bad. Now it is time for them to face the consequences of losses on their investments.
Tell a lie loud enough and long enough and pretty soon everyone will believe it. Such is the case with US income taxes. See losthorizons.com for the amazing truth about taxation in America.
A Economy built on wealth creation will increase tax revenue based on expanding wealth
How Gov. can spur this is lowering taxes, cutting Gov. employees & Power & letting the private sector, individuals be able to succeed or fail based on their own talents & abilities !
Ilana – we have no big philosophical arguments on the need to cut government. Milton Friedman CORRECTLY said that the size of government is the SPENDING, not the taxes or borrowing or printing. Geithner is obviously using the messy nature of hideously complex “tax code” (Reagan simplified it in 1987 only to have 24 years of Congress adding Christmas tree ornaments into the code) as a shield to keeping government large.
Still, the American population (including many “Tea Party” crybabies) always say (to pollsters) DON’T CUT X-Y-Z (“seniors”, “defense”, etc.). So I would love to see a nice annoying 20 cent gas tax increase – and, if possible signs at each pump. Some samples:
A picture of one of the Karzai cousin’s Kabul McMansions – “this Kabul mansion bought by your tax dollars!”.
Maybe a picture of military retirees on an Officer Club Golf Course – “this golf course for retired generals maintained by your tax dollars”.
What if one reduced the “over 65” tax deduction $ 1 for every $ 3 of Social Security received – is that a “tax increase” or a “benefit reduction”???? Well, I can answer that – it is POLITICAL DEATH at the hands of the AARP!
In seventy years on this earth and having read I don’t know how many history books; I have not seen so many liars or distortions told. Hitler and Stalin were both good and I understand Mussolini was great; but, none of them could hold a candle to the present bunch in the Administrative branch.