SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: tejek who wrote (887307)9/14/2015 3:55:19 PM
From: TimF1 Recommendation

Recommended By
TideGlider

  Read Replies (1) of 1576022
 
Yes it said there could be a massive increase in productivity (I didn't use the term massive increase, but that's what a big enough increase could reasonably be called). There is no sign whatsoever of such an increase happening.

It also talked about reducing spending. No direct reduction would be necessary if the future growth was reigned in, but reigning in the growth of this spending seems to be what you've been opposing from the beginning.

It also talked about raising taxes, but that isn't really an answer. It doesn't answer affordability at all. The point is that taxes probably can't raise enough money. As has been pointed out to you more than once but you keep ignoring at every rate from single digit income tax rates all the way up to 90%, the feds have never been able to raise enough money as a percentage of GDP, to cover the projected cost of entitlement spending, let alone entitlement spending and interest on the debt (even with leaving $0 for everything else). Well technically the issue here is just Social Security. Enough could be raised to let Social Security spending keep climbing in to the stratosphere, but not to cover that and Medicare and Medicaid both doing the same.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext