{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/13/2016 7:52:05 AM
4
I like the naïveté of the thought in the article, "Making those tax cuts is irresponsible."
Perhaps. But maybe, just maybe, hemorrhaging money at an unsustainable rate (40% of current expenditures alone go to entitlements) is also irresponsible.
And so we're clear, the Tax Foundation has established that under a tax plan that Sanders proposes, national GDP would start to see a decline, as well as [i]everybody's[/i] take-home income.
English
-
Edited by WalterPuppet: 4/13/2016 7:30:22 PMI think the point their getting at is that you can't reasonable reduce your debt and income at the same time. That would be like trying to pay off your loans by quitting a high paying job to work at McDonald's. Edit: I decided to reread the article and it doesn't mention how much they intend on reducing taxes, if at all. I suppose if they could reasonably reduce spending and not mess with taxes then maybe we could reduce some of the national debt.
-
That's because their analysis of Sanders tax plan is of his tax plan alone, and doesn't include [b][u]any[/u][/b] of his other policies, and some of those taxes are ties directly to those, like his healthcare proposal.
-
Let's be realistic though. Government spending has NEVER decreased.
-
Edited by SuperStormDroid: 4/13/2016 6:28:31 PMAlso, its expensive to run the US government.
