Sometimes, I think in our panic about this bailout, people forget we can raise taxes.

[closeupready]

There is no reason why would couldn't simply raise taxes in order to balance the budget and help pay off debt. And obviously, you'd raise them on those who have money, not on those who are struggling.

And of course, you could clearly cut billions from the defense budget.

What am I missing here?

[jpgray]

1. A half century of the defense and financial sectors being in bed with government?

[closeupready]

5. We need to take our government back, of course.

n/t

[dbonds]

2. Middle class can't afford anymore taxes.

I have about 30% of my check taken out as it is.

[closeupready]

4. That's what I'm saying; raise it on those who (essentially)

constitute the base of the GOP - the haves and have-mores. They are the ones who this bailout is essentially benefiting. No, you can't frame it like that, but that is what would be fair.

[Trajan]

9. Did someone say they were raising middle class taxes ?

As a side note: Funny how the supply siders HATE taxes, but dont seem to mind getting gouged to death by speculators, energy producers and other financial flim flammers ....

Taxes bad ... Exorbitant prices good ...

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

3. Well, anyone with two neurons to rub together...

Would tell you that defense cuts are going to HAVE to be on the table. For fuck sake, all we have to do is crack the books on the heavily-weighted-towards-the-Air-Farce "black" projects and there will be $US100Billion or so right there.

Too much of the nation's treasure, dedicated to defense spending, is tied up in the empire-building efforts of these black projects and too many of them go on for years, with no measurable progress or results. They simply exist to give generals a lot of money under their purvue and money is power and influence in the 5-sided Funhouse.

[tridim]

6. Well Bush just raised them, by at least a trillion dollars.

Of course it'll be delayed until after he's long gone so it can be blamed on the Democrats.

[Naturalist]

7. Do Democrats really get it?

I would like to point out first, that the Republican Mantra has always been privatizing social security. Investing in the Stock Market is a Gamble, always has been, and some people lost everything in 1929. This is why I never invest in the Stock Market and why I have opposed privatizing Social Security. What is happening right now, is their plans have failed miserably. They are scrambling to get money to help keep it propped up so it doesn't fall. Another Mantra they have is Ownership Society, which is another way of saying your on your own. They don't like Social Security and Welfare becuase it helps people not Corporations. If your a Democrat that has invested in the Stock Market you should be ashamed of yourself. I know a lot of you have. You have been proping up the only thing that backs all their Mantras. Without it they have nothing. I for one, aggresively oppose helping out the Stock Market. I don't have any pity what so ever for Gamblers. You loose your money too bad. I however, do have pity for Corporations that I am working for, provided that they have listened to at least some of my suggestions. If they have not listened at all, well, then why should I have pitty for them? I have worked for many Companies that I warned them about what they were doing. They are no longer in business. Same goes for any neighbor that doesn't seem to get it. If it's a neighbor that him or his wife has gone through some medical problems or have lost a job but are aggresively looking for another and have taken that minimun wage job while looking for something better then YES I do have pity for them and would like to help. That is Democrat!

[closeupready]

10. I do agree that many Democrats are involved in the market.

Like probably Pelosi and Reid and others. They are as likely to agree to this bailout as much for personal reasons and political ones.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

8. You are missing that economic growth is as important a determinant of revenue as tax rates

You are also missing that much future tax revenue is taxing of money that doesn't even exist yet. (Even if you confiscated 100% of the world's wealth you wouldn't have enough to cover outstanding debts. Debts are much greater than the actual amount of money.)

Bill Clinton raised taxes, but it required the steady growth of the economy to balance the budget. The same taxes rates in a recession wouldn't have brought in nearly as much revenue.

The Bush era is a double-whammy: lower tax rates AND a sucky economy, so defecits grow and grow.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. The reality is that hard times are coming and nobody can "fix" it.

Certainly not the politicians.

They dare not cut the military budget significantly, because of the "terrorists" or other bogeymen.

If they try and tax the rich they have the money to, if not prevent them, to simply move themselves and their money elsewhere.

This has turned into a very predictable economic catastrophe and we are, still, only beginning to see the effects.

The worst case scenario is hyperinflation, followed by severe devaluation of the dollar, followed by some "leader" who will offer a "solution".

[galileoreloaded]

12. Actually, if you want to collect less $$ raise taxes at this point.....

You will see survival instinct kick in like no other as people turn to grey and black markets to avoid the taxes on everything. It worked for Clinton, because everyone thought they were flush or at least static intheir earning capacity. Come to find out that since Regean we have been losing wage and buying power, and there is nothing left to give, at least at the middle class. How do you feel about your capacity to earn in the next oh, five years?? The tax man is all the sudden not the one to be as feared anymore, and people act accordingly.

[closeupready]

13. Maybe, but that's what laws against tax evasion are for.

n/t

[galileoreloaded]

14. Not arguing the ethics, just the reality.. N/T

[backscatter712]

15. Time to eat the rich.

Most of us have seen the L-curve ( http://www.lcurve.org/ ) in one form or another.

The income of the top one percent in this country is greater than that of the bottom 95%.

You and I know what this means. Obama knows this too, as the Washington Post graph shows.

All we have to do is raise taxes on the wealthiest 5%, and the .gov will have a tremendous amount of new income.

Of course, persuading all the assholes in Congress to do this won't be easy, as the top 1% income earners in this country have great lobbyists, and plenty of money to donate to political campaigns...

But we can solve the .gov's money woes, pay off that enormous debt, have enough to fix our country's infrastructure, bring us universal health care, turbocharge our schools, and do everything we need to do, and still have plenty left over to afford a tax cut for the poor, working and middle classes if we take this advice:

EAT THE RICH!

They're fat and tasty!

[readmoreoften]

16. Oh awesome. So our money still goes to CEOs but quicker?