Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Well, I'm not a CPA or actuary, but from what I've read, there are an equal number of arguments that go against this statement.
it is a tough call. we've had these cuts now for 6? years under two administrations and the economy has continued down the crapper...
the compromise will be to kick this can down the road for another year or so and then deal with it, which will spawn this argument all over.
|
I look at it as more of an issue with the spending we've had over the last 6 years.
If you cut out the fat you need less tax revenue. I don’t think anyone can argue (Dem, Ind, Rep) that there is too much money wasted in Government. More tax revenue adds fuel to that fire. It doesn’t make people look at the real problems and doesn’t make them look at areas where there is too much waste. It enables status quo and usually more spending.
A very small example: The town I live in had a question a few years ago on a School budget issue and the School committee said “If we do not get more revenue from the town, teachers will lose jobs. “ Citizens said no new taxes and basically told the school committee to figure it out. Miraculously, the school system was able to figure it out. They decided to stagger the start times of schools so that not all schools opened and closed at the same time everyday. This meant a reduction in 2/3 the amount of school buses need. (one bus could handle 3 routes vs 1 route b/c kids didn’t need to all be picked up and dropped off at school at the same time). Anyway, this savings (near $1 million) was able to cover the shortfall and no teachers were laid off. If taxes were increased, this solution would not have happened and taxes would have been raised.
Raising taxes is the lazy and easy way out in my opinion, we need to look at all the waste and make everything lean again. When that happens, we will not need as much tax revenue.
I’m not an account or economist, I’m a sales guy so what do I know anyway.
