Quote:
Originally Posted by Baraka_Guru
Hong Kong's personal taxes go as high as 15%, and as much as 90% of its GDP is in services. Hardly a test market for the U.S.
Though I cannot argue against sound fiscal policy.
But I don't see the U.S. having such any time soon.
|
Actually Baraka, it is now at 16% or so. The 5-10% I quoted is the ideal I would like to see. I don't see why it couldn't work in the US. C'mon people, let's not be so pessimistic here. Positive attitudes all around now
-----Added 22/7/2008 at 12 : 56 : 04-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
jorgelito...there is really not that much discretionary, non-defense spending to cut...certainly not enough to make a big difference....and it would take a flat tax of far more than 5-10% and/or a significant increase in state and local taxes.
The most recent proposal was Huckabee's "fair tax" which eliminated the federal income tax and replaced it with an effective 30% national sales tax. The fallacies are laid out here.
The deficit was not only reduced in the late 90s...we had several years of budget surpluses....based on a simple "pay as you go" principle that was abandoned in 2001.
-----Added 21/7/2008 at 11 : 34 : 41-----
9/11 and the tech bubble burst contributed to the exploding deficit and national debt..but by most objective measures, so did Bush's tax cuts and war funding. |
I agree. I remember the healthy surpluses we had back in the 90s. I remember thinking we should have paid down the deficit. I can't recall but I think George used it for a tax refund (which isn't necessarily a horrible idea in of itself).
But the airline bailout and war funding really killed it. To me it's more than just numbers of positive and negative. There's waste there to be sure. Egregious waste I bet. Tightening the belt is a good start and having each gov't agency held fiscally responsible and accountable would be good too. There's too much shenanigans involved in the bidding and contracting process. I would like to see that rectified. And seriously, no more pork.