Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:I'm all for abolishing the IRS (Score 1) 349

Citation needed. I hear this a lot but never seem to hear any evidence of it.

The US used to have a maximum tax rate of over 90%, but fewer millionaires left the country than now when the tax rates are historically very low.

Deductions from income allowed the average person to pay, in inflation adjusted dollars, less than HALF of what they pay today in taxes. Sure, it was nominally a higher rate - but the Federal Government received a little less than half the dollars, per capita, than it did back in those days. Elimination of deductions, constant lowering of income brackets, addition of additional taxes all add up to more than doubling the Federal Government's revenue. Even with a nominally lower tax rate.

Comment Re:I'm all for abolishing the IRS (Score 1) 349

What Clinton surplus? If we had an actual surplus, would our national debt have increased every year (meaning we spent more than we brought in)? The fact is the "Clinton surplus" NEVER existed. It was a nicely crafted lie. The annual debt has increased EVERY YEAR since Ike was a President. Clinton's "surplus" was from the same set of lies that allowed President Obama to claim a $486 billion deficit in 2014 even though we added nearly $1.1 trillion in new debt. How the debt goes up when you supposedly have a surplus, or how a $486 billion deficit creates $1.1 trillion in debt is a mystery that can only be solved in Washington DC.

Comment Re:The Clintons (Score 1) 315

Please see Debt to the Penny - a Government (Treasury Department) site. Please find the last year that we had a year-over-year reduction in debt (meaning - a real, not paper, surplus). HINT: you'll have to go back about 60 years... After that, we added debt - meaning ran an actual deficit - every single year.

Comment Re:The Clintons (Score 1) 315

She was NEVER in-line for being president.

Ah, I typo-ed. She was fourth in line, not second. You know, because of that pesky US Constitution, which says so in plain language as it establishes the presidential line of succession. Your idea of "never" is pretty strange, but it sure does make you sound righteous enraged and all!

He's a liberal. The Constitution is irrelevant, and can be ignored - or misquoted - at will.

Slashdot Top Deals

Those who can, do; those who can't, write. Those who can't write work for the Bell Labs Record.

Working...