Torone: Don't read this post, it's irrelevant.
The Boortz comments are interesting, if for no other reason than to point out a VERY common bullshit tactic in politics: playing with the numbers and trying to make the other guy look bad.
The whole discussion had nothing to do with the actual budget, nothing to do with what it means in people's pockets over the next 10 years, nothing to do with the future tax increases that are to come, but rather dedicated to try to diss a single democrat comment about how big of a budget bust this all is.
Interestingly, you will notice that he doesn't mention WHICH Presidents were in charge in 1983 and 1992 - the answers are Reagan and Bush. Thus, we have the biggest budget busts sinse the last time the voodoo economic people were in power. Nothing new here, except to remind you all what happened to your taxes and government service level once the party was over ("read my lips, no new taxes" followed by a major tax hike).
You have to remember too that, even if there is a boost to federal income as a result of a tax cut, I am sure that this boost effect has been written into the future forecasts. So this is the best case scenerio, from what I can tell.
It should be illegal for tax cuts and such to be set past the legislative date of the current president / house / congress.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
|