Washington is hooked on spending. Like other addicts, politicians tell lies to get their fix. Jonesing for more money, they insist that raising the debt limit is the best way to limit America's debt. What the debt debate needs is an injection of honesty, not more debt. In that spirit, I outline in my column @ Human Events five falsehoods of the debt debate.

I question your #2. You really think cutting taxes during war time had nothing to do with our current debt crisis?

obijuan,

Many tea baggers and conservatives don't understand Laffer's curve and how it works. Lowering marginal rates increases revenue if, and only if, current tax rates are to the right of the crest of Laffer's curve. If the data point is to the left, as it was immediately before the Bush tax cuts were implemented, revenue decreases. It's simple addition and subtraction that is so difficult for the baggers to wrap their heads around.

The justification for #5 rests on a very poorly worded and completely stupid polling question: "Do you favor increasing taxes in conjunction with raising the debt ceiling?" This is like asking "Do you like being punched in the head immediately before being kicked in the balls?" Some masochists will respond in the affirmative, but for most this is a no-brainer. The proper polling question for Rasmussen to ask would've been a clear and distinct one, not a question that muddles two different concepts together. One such question would be, "Do you favor a marginal tax increase of 3% on the the richest 1% of Americans?" or alternatively "Do you favor raising taxes on wealthy Americans?" 80% of Americans most assuredly agree with doing those two things.

“I question your #2. You really think cutting taxes during war time had nothing to do with our current debt crisis?”

I question your question and raise you a question. Do you really think that a Party and a President that has spent 41% of all the money ever spent by government (43% or every dollar borrowed) in just three years hasn’t been the biggest part of our current debt crisis?

Furthermore, the national debt as a percentage of gross domestic product has increased from 40 percent in 2008 to 62 percent this year and an estimated 72 percent in 2012. And if this President has his way, it will be at a 90 percent level where we are at fiscal collapse.

And we know that Obama is serial liar and a crisis monger so his statement that 80% of American people want a tax increase (when they see the cost of everything going up, up and up due to failed and misguided Keynesian fiscal policies) is ludicrous and based on nothing but whatever is rattling around in his head.

We are currently the brokest nation on the Planet, albeit with good credit (for now). The line needs to be drawn as the only group who seem to be serious about cutting spending, taxes and getting some control over our debt problems are the ones who actually pay bills and taxes and who will end up on the wrong side of runaway government fiscal policies.

Thank you PMA, for proving point 1, yet again. We get it, conservatives are F'ing morons.

Anyhoo....Spending is NOT the problem (though it's a big problem). The tax rate is NOT the problem (though it should be lower!). The problem is the ridiculous overhead placed on each and every American industry by over-regulation and the subsequent flight of employers to countries that are more friendly (at least in that respect) over the last 20 years. We need to wrap our heads around this: a large percentage of the companies that have fled to China, India, Brazil, etc., wouldn't come back to the U.S. IF THEIR EMPLOYEES WORKED FOR FREE. We'd be rolling in cash if those industries were still HERE, and still EMPLOYING people and still PAYING TAXES.

If we're going to get really serious about the economy, we need to ask ourselves how to reverse this. The rest of this debate is a bunch of pre-election crap.

Highest corporate tax rate in the world.

And now the uncertainty of more regulations and in general not knowing where this government is taking us is killing business in this country.

Unless you're a wholly owned subsidiary of the U.S. Government and/or a friend of Obama. Like G.E.

Japan is the highest. And taxes are NOT the issue. The issue is the out of control regulatory environment. We could withstand even Japanese rates if we had sound regulatory policies that ATTRACT business.

Most of what I hear on the business beat and investment shows or read says that the U.S. is numero uno, but the graph on Wiki shows Japan ever so slightly being higher than the U.S. Will take your word for it.

Bottom line is that the U.S. just ain't that business friendly these days. And last I looked, real jobs and real revenue is generated by private business.

But is this not the kind of environment that an ardent follower of Saul Alinsky hopes for?

Oh look, us Baggers can use Wikipedia also:

"In practice, the shape of a hypothetical Laffer curve for a given economy can only be estimated."

"Graphical representations of the curve sometimes appear to put the rate at around 50%, but the optimal rate could theoretically be any percentage greater than 0% and less than 100%. Similarly, the curve is often presented as a parabolic shape, but there is no reason that this is necessarily the case."

"One potential result of the Laffer curve is that increasing tax rates beyond a certain point will become counterproductive for raising further tax revenue. A hypothetical Laffer curve for any given economy can only be estimated and such estimates are sometimes controversial."

So, basically, you can read the curve into whatever scheme you want. Laffer's curve talks about possibilities and conjecture, rather than reality. One man can read it to propose increasing the tax rate, another can read it to propose decreasing the tax rate, both claiming that it will increase tax revenue.

Guldarnit Ma, that interlectual can make the graphs say whatever he wants!

That's the Larry Laffer curve.

Yes Homer, it certainly is.

I think we can sum up Obama's position with the words of J. Wellington Wimpy.

"I'd gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today."

And just like Wimpy, we know he's not going to.

NR,

That's a completely separate issue, but an important one that I don't dispute, and never disputed in my first post (as usual, you read into my comment things that simply are not written). Go back, read the post again, take a deep breath, and stop trying to distort my arguments and knock down straw men. The only point is that if a tax rate is to the left of the crest of the curve, lowering that tax rate will decrease revenue as a mathematical law. No reasonable person can possibly argue in any way, shape, or form that we are still to the left of the crest of the curve. This by itself does not invalidate the appropriateness of cutting taxes, but to argue that cutting taxes will raise revenue, as many conservatives like McConnell, Ryan, and Hatch do, is mere claptrap.

Regarding the corporate tax rates that baggers like Bachmann continually discuss, it is literally true that the U.S. tax code contains one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. However, a couple facts must be held in one's mind in order to get a clearer picture of the actual state of taxation (I know that's hard for you Tea Bag sheep, but do try because it's good for you). First, although many countries have lower corporate tax rates, personal tax rates are significantly higher. This encourages reinvestment into the corporation as opposed to the ownership and management classes simply pocketing the profits as personal income. Secondly, and most importantly, just because the tax rate is 35% does not mean that any corporation will actually pay 35%. Oil and gas companies and major agribusinesses receive tax subsidies. GE paid 0%, that's right, absolutely nothing, on billions in profit during 2010. Again, this by itself does not invalidate the appropriateness of cutting taxes, but it does shatter the Tea Bagger myth that U.S. corporations are taxed more than foreign corporations. In the conservative U.S. system, might makes right, and corporations command the government to do their bidding. Just look at defense contracts and tax rates for major corporations.

The facts are important.

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//2-28-11tax-f1-infocus.jpg

Too funny. You call people idiots and then tell them to calm down when they take exception. Are you even capable of having a respectful conversation?

How about having the 51% (up from 47% since Emperor O took over)of people not paying taxes contribute something? Hmmmmm?!

And with all his talk of 'sacrifice', why is it that Big G is the only one that will not sacrifice one f'en thing? Hmmmmm?!

Ultimately, this is not a battle about revenues - it's a battle about spending.