musclebrains
New member
MattTheSkywalker said:MuscleBrains
The point was that if the GDP outgrows the deficit, it is (long term) OK. Not suer if I agree, and not sure if I want to get into a situation where the "turnaround point" puts us $20T in the hole.
Also, almost half the deficit is money owed to Social Security. This is in accordance with an old law and not a bad thing. The SS surplus must be used to buy Treasury notes.
Last thing is - the "tax cut for the rich" is a class warfare misnomer. The existing tax code is a middle class subsidy. Forget the graduated scale. Rich people have very few deductions that the middle class makes extensive use of.
I understand your pt. about the GDP. Even Krugman, as liberal as you get, acknowledges that. The point is that, even before the Iraq expenses were finally proposed, the difference in GDP and the deficit was predicted to be reduced from about 4.5 to 1 percent because of the tax cuts, SS nothwithstanding. That is too close for any reasonable person's comfort.
Your calling the existing tax code "a middle class subsidy" is a misnomer of class warfare.
