Income Inequality

How in any mind is a deduction of tax liability "free stuff"?

And yes, it will trickle down. Anyone who takes out loans to buy a home is going to take the money from reduced tax liability and spend it elsewhere. Tips to waiters, landscaper/gardeners, housekeepers, nannies/childcare, and hundreds of other little things till the money is all spent. Where it will be taxed again.

For someone who wants to be more like Norway or Sweden your rhetoric is all wrong.

Because money is fungible. Give someone a certain amount of money or reduce their tax liability by that amount - it has EXACTLY the same effect.

Some start with the premise that everything belongs to the government. 'It' allows you to keep some things. The stuff it allows you to keep is your 'free stuff'. You should be grateful for your free stuff, comrade. There are people in North Korea who don't get any free stuff.

As Boiler suspected, Forkie won't state what "fair share" actually is.

"Free stuff" would be defined as things received and aren't paid for. We had a balanced budget at the end of the 20th Century. The two biggest line items that destroyed that budget where massive tax cuts for rich people and massive military intervention in the Middle East. And we dont need to take a roll call to know who was for and against those endeavors on this board.

The "Free Stuff" healthcare law that was passed in 2009 actually is paid for - and then some. it even pays for other imbalances in the budget. And the "Free Stuff" Bernie Sanders advocates is paid for with tax increases and Wall St fees.

Meanwhile the "Free Stuff" being pushed by all Republican candidates in 2016 is just that - because they are (for the millionth time) telling the public you can pay for things by cutting taxes for wealthy people.

It would be wise for Americans to keep Republicans out of office until they learn how to do math.

Federal tax revenue grew by 45% or $800b dueing this period. Military spending grew by $350b.

Another pj theory blows up

Maybe we do need a roll call, since you're responding to my post and I never favored the Invasion of Iraq and have suggested both spending cuts and tax increases to balance the budget....just like President Obama's Non-Partisan National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform...which he ignored.

Of course, I'm no Republican or Democrat, but didn't your leading Democratic Presidential Candidate vote for that massive military intervention in the Middle East that destroyed the budget? Didn't the leading Republican Candidate oppose the invasion of Iraq and is questioning the US Taxpayer funding of our role as the World's policeman? Maybe it's time to rethink which party stands for what. I'd like a roll call, please.

I didn't accuse AlanLeroy of supporting any issue.

But we know who the people on this board are who constantly demand lower taxes for themselves and an elimination of the billionaire estate tax..... even as they also demand more aggressive military action with Iran - and Ukraine - and North Korea, and building a 2000 mile wall along Mexico, and increasing the border patrol to a bigger size than the FBI, and a massive increase to navy vessels. They seem to believe "cutting taxes" is synonymous with "reducing government"...and that'[s a big part of their problem, isn't it?

Its true that most liberals want more government spending too. The difference is they are honest about paying for it.

a few months ago I suggested a 1% across the board cut in all federal spending and pj almost had a stroke

I would support "across the board" spending cuts, including on the military. People will bitch, but running a constant deficit is not sustainable and, in fact, is certain to lead to financial disaster.

We need far more than a 1% cut, however.