Dave Ramsey on Debt

[two shoes]

I linked to actually hard numbers from the white house that you can download in excel spread sheets and that will not be read or understood by the left.

Funniest thing I have read all day....

[tmleadr03]

Funniest thing I have read all day....

Christ, did I type that? Fuck that made my head hurt just now reading it. Talking on the phone and posting online do not mix.

[mutt]

So raise taxes......... back to 1960s levels

Govt, especially our current one, cannot be trusted with more money. To use the family budget analogy: A responsible family realises it needs to take in more money to cover its obligations. Naturally they cut as much from the budget as they can (cable, eating out, vacations, etc) and then take on a second job to bring in more revenue so they claw themselves out of debt. Once the debt is paid and they realise they can live within their means, they quit the second job and hopefully live well.

Here's what our govt would do - It would refuse to cut its spending. It would get the second job (higher taxes) and realise the additional money would allow them to take on more debt and do more pork projects. So instead of making it better they would make the situation worse. Later they would again run into the brick wall of revenue being less than obligations and then demand even higher taxes (a third job) saying 'You can't cut yourself out of this'. No thanks.

They need to cut. If the budget line item isn't vital to the function of this country, it gets cut. If it is vital, we make sure it only gets the funding it needs and not a penny more. I'm a firm believer that govt should always be under-funded by 2%. That way there is no room for pork and only the most important things get funding.

[two shoes]

Christ, did I type that? Fuck that made my head hurt just now reading it. Talking on the phone and posting online do not mix.

I wasn't busting your chops on the grammar, it was the:

...that will not be read or understood by the left.

That's what struck me as funny. The grammar only adds to it!

[nynco]

Again you have failed to look at real numbers and how people behave with their money in the real world. Here's the graph of Tax Revenue as a Percetage of GDP again. Even when the marginal tax rate topped out over 50%, the government never captured more than 20% or GDP. Also notice how revenue went UP after lowering taxes in 1986 and up again after lowering taxes in 2003! That's not voodoo, those are numbers you can't argue with.

The debt has exploded because of the failed belief in Keynesian economics and government getting too big. There's real "voodoo" economics!

So why did our Debt explode under Reagan?

[tmleadr03]

So raise taxes......... back to 1960s levels

So many people have quoted this I now have to come back, find the ignorant post and reply to it.


According to this: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...s/hist01z2.xls

From 1960 to 1970 our average revenue from tax receipts was 18% of GDP. With a lowest of 17% of GDP and a highest of 19.7% of GDP. Median was 17.8%. How did high taxes help again?

[tmleadr03]

So why did our Debt explode under Reagan?

Holy fucking shit. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending. Spending.

Taxes under Reagan took in a very high amount of revenue because he lowered taxes.

[nynco]

I maintain that Reagan only took in more revenue because he increase borrowing and spending. Which he did.

There is no free lunch.

As to tax levels of the 1960s one major difference. Those taxes back then were targeted at business and other wealthy targets more than the middle class. Today the middle class pays a larger portion of their earnings in taxes than they did in the 1960s. We need to close tax loop holes like the ones that give tax breaks to corporations for outsourcing American jobs over seas.

[CrufflerSteve]

Again you have failed to look at real numbers and how people behave with their money in the real world. Here's the graph of Tax Revenue as a Percetage of GDP again. Even when the marginal tax rate topped out over 50%, the government never captured more than 20% or GDP. Also notice how revenue went UP after lowering taxes in 1986 and up again after lowering taxes in 2003! That's not voodoo, those are numbers you can't argue with.

The debt has exploded because of the failed belief in Keynesian economics and government getting too big. There's real "voodoo" economics!

That model worked well in times of some real growth and confidence. A major failing al most all models is a belief in equilibrium, that things go naturally to optimal levels. Our current economic state is off the charts into the squirrelly zone. If we cut taxes I doubt if revenue will increase at all. In normal times people spend it and businesses create jobs. Now everybody will just sit on the money so no new activiity. All these models are voodoo when it comes to explaining the extremes.

nynco, I agree with your more tham most but I don't think I share your faith that more revenue now would be anything more than good money after bad. I do share many members lack of faith in the government actually living within limits without some real constraints keeping it under control. Just one little earmark here, one little emergency allocation and its back to business as usual.

Steve

[two shoes]

Would Dave Ramsey agree to a 10% flat tax for everyone? If you draw income from any source, you get whacked 10% Could be any percentage 8-18%

To keep math easy...

You make: You pay:

20,000 - 2,000
200,000 - 20,000
2,000,000 - 200,000

Everyone would have the same burden. I remember watching Warren Buffet claim he paid less in taxes than his secretary... I have a problem with that... thousands of pages of tax laws are bullshit.

The gov't needs to start cutting like an EMO kid... only deeper