Well, I'm headed back to Denver after a 2 year absence. Anyone interested in meeting up for some Fat Tire and a Thai Pie at Old Chicago's should leave me a message in the comments. I'll let you know how to find me.
Harvey is onto something here.
And please, Lord, make people stop saying #10.
I've watched, with both horror and interest, the debate over America's current insolvency problem. Excuse, the "raising the debt ceiling" debate. Interest because I want to see if we as a country as actually willing to tackle this issue and horror because I cannot believe the numerical illiteracy on display.
1) Those so called punitive cuts were not cuts. When you add 7 trillion in debt over 10 years instead of only 10 trillion, that's not a cut. You can argue all you want but we as a country are currently projected to spend 7-8 trillion more than we have over the next decade, raising our country's debt to more than 21 trillion.
2) Moody's and S&P both wanted at least 4 trillion in cuts in DC's deal, regardless of the cuts being fraudulent DC cuts or not. The current deal did NOT reach that point. Ergo, the downgrade.
3) All you increase revenue people keep ignoring history and reality. History shows that regardless of taxation levels, the revenue always-always- comes back to around 19% of GDP. History shows that increasing taxes is a drag on the economy. And the reality is that no matter what level of revenue comes into DC, the dimwits on Capitol Hill will find a way to spend more. Those blowjobs your unicorn is giving you doesn't change any of those points.
4) Increasing taxes on businesses? No such thing. Taxes and fees are a cost of doing business and that cost is passed onto to all of the consumers, meaning that "tax increases on the rich" are actually taxes on everyone. Feel free to ask the former carpenters, electricians and shipwrights who used to work in the northeast how that yacht building business is going these days. Oh right, you can't: the "taxes on the rich" kill that industry here and moved it permanently overseas.
5) The phrase "allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire" is complete and utter horseshit. Those rate adjustments have been law for a decade. Repealing them is a tax increase. And to those idiots who say "we're simply reverting to a previous level of taxation", I say that going back to the maximum 2% envisioned when the income tax was codified would be awesome. Somehow, I don't think that that's exactly what they mean.
You know how to increase revenues? Get more people employed, which broadens the tax bases. To do so, our government would have to do things it has intention of doing: reducing onerous and costly regulations and taxes on businesses. But hey, why try what's always worked instead of what's always failed?
Oh yeah: I plan on blogging semi-regularly again. I used to do it on my lunch hour or at home. The first one can't happen anymore because work blocks my ability to do so and the second one was made a lot tougher when child #3 came along. But he's old enough now for me to get a few minutes to myself now and again.