This has nothing to do with class warfare. It has to do with choices. In addition to cutting spending, the Fed will need more revenue to balance the budget. To continue on the path Bush has put us on is DISASTER. There are two basic groups that can pay higher taxes. The middle income workers and the wealthy. To increase taxes on the Middle Income workers has a greater negative impact on demand then to get the added revenue from the wealthy. The spending of the wealthy will not be impacted by higer taxes. That is Economics. The higher taxes are not to punish those that are better off but to bring the Federal revenue into balance with spending. If you look at the budget, you will see that there is no combination of spending cuts that are possible to balance the budget much less begin developing a surplus with which to begin repaying the $8 Trillion of debt. Choices need to be made and effective leaders make the HARD choices. Bush is no leader! He is a front for people that want to add more to their wealth then to help solve the fiscal problems of this country. Bill Gates and Warren Buffet understand what should be done. Too bad most of the so called conservatives in the GOP do not have as good an understanding.

as long as it isn't you, right rich boy!

He doesn't ignore it in the least..." Since when was silence, denial?

You obviously ain't been around here much, have you? col is almost NEVER silent. And they're right, he wastews no opportunity to go off on a hate Bush rant!

First I am not rich. I am in the middle class. This has nothing to do with disliking Bush. It has to do with what is BEST for America. The deficit will harm EVERY person in this country. We are moving toward $500 Billion per year in INTEREST. In just one year that money could have been used to rebuild the Gulf, Texas and Florida from the storms with some to spare. Because of the Bush fiscal policy we will spend that money on intetest rather then to help with the many needs of the people in this country. In two years the intetest will soon equal a Trillion dollars. That would, by some estimates, rebuild all the dams, bridges, schools, water/sewer systems and electrical grids all over the United States. In 10 years the money we will spend on intetest would SOLVE the Medicare and Social Security funding needs for 100 years. The Bush policy will spend all that money but not to help the American People. In fact 40% will not even be paid to Americans. It will go to countries like China. These are the CHOICES Bush has made and they are WRONG for this country--Rich or poor. For all you Bushies that hate BIG government spending, get use to it. The added interest caused by the fiscal policy of GWB will increase Federal spending without end. That intetest never stops until we repay the debt. Between 1980 and 2004, the taxpayers have paid $6.5 Trillion in intetrest. The debt began to climb with Reagan who did the very same thing as Bush and took the debt from under 1 Trillion to 4 Trillion when he left office. It took until 2000 before we stopped adding to the debt. In 2001 Bush began the same process as Reagan but at an even faster pace. By the time Bush returns to Texas, the national debt, by his own estimate, will be over $10 Trillion from $5.7 Trillion when he took office. That will cost the taxpayers @ 5% $500 Billion in intetest EVERY YEAR. I hope All you BS artists that support Bush will enjoy paying for him and his fiscal policies!

Gene, I understand that you don't hate the man; you hate his manner of solving certain economic problems. That's fine with me, really. I do think your hatred is unfounded, though.

I have trouble seeing this disaster you predict. Since Bush came into office, the fact is that the economy has improved steadily each quarter, and unemployment has dropped to just over 5%--which is almost ideal.

I believe that the Bush tax cuts have helped make this possible, and that the long-term benefit of growing the eocnomy right now will do much more for our country than the short term benefit of raising taxes right now.

I know you believe differently than I do. I'm not sure what we can do to change that, though. I'm not convinced by any argument you've made so far, and you're not convinced by any of my arguments either.

If you won't acknowledge or explain the quarterly positive growth numbers and the low unemployment rate, and we won't admit that deficit spending will destroy us all, maybe it's time to stop this, don't you think? All that abuse from Dr. Guy can't be good for your mood.

If as you claim the economy is good, Why are we speding over $500 billion more then we tax? Pump priming was used in the past to get the economy started. We have had FIVE years of large deficits that have added $2.3 Trillion to the total national debt. What is worse, there is NO end to the annual deficits in the future! Add to this that Bush wants to make the tax cuts permanent which will take even more from the Federal revenue and make the defcit even bigger.

As to job growth. In 2000 the unemployment rate was 3.9%. Since 2001 about 2 million MORE workers have come into the work force then jobs created. Many of the jobs that have been created pay less with fewer benefits. The poverty index increased in each of the last four years.

The interest that we will be REQUIRED to pay on the $10 Trillion of debt that will be in place by Jan 2009 will be more EACH year then we spend on National defense. Think of that- MORE interest than to pay to maintain the ARMY, NAVY, MARINES, AIR FORCE and ALL weapons procurement combined!!!!! In 1979 Americans paid about $60 Billion in intetrest. We are heading toward $500 Billion EVERY YEAR.

A Dictatorship!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Once again you prove you are nothing but a radical left wing fanatic.

The deficit will harm EVERY person in this country.

The deficit hasn't harmed me in any way, and doesn't look like it ever will.

As to job growth. In 2000 the unemployment rate was 3.9%. Since 2001 about 2 million MORE workers have come into the work force then jobs created. Many of the jobs that have been created pay less with fewer benefits. The poverty index increased in each of the last four years.

Col, do you remember when you were called out about how you distort the unemployement numbers? Poverty is not the fault of the President or government, it's the fault of the person. Poverty is a choice col.

Rule #1 - Blame Bush

Rule #2 - If it isn't Bush's fault, see Rule #1.

Island Dog

If you pay federal incime taxes the deficit has harmed you since it is your tax dollars that help pay that interest.

It was Bush who said it would be easier as a Dictatorship so long as "HE WAS THE DICTATOR"

The unemployment rate in 2001 was 3.9% It is also true that about 2 million MORE workers came into the work force then jobs created since 2001. It is also true, living wage jobs are a growing peoblem and fewer jobs include health and retirement benefits today then in 2001!

If you pay federal incime taxes the deficit has harmed you since it is your tax dollars that help pay that interest.

Doesn't "harm" me col. My taxes go to a lot of things I don't want them to, welfare for instance. The fact is it does not affect your daily life.

It was Bush who said it would be easier as a Dictatorship so long as "HE WAS THE DICTATOR"

Col you are a left wing hack. You keep implying that Bush is a "dictator" which is typical left wing rhetoric. When called out you always resort to this little quote which you have never posted in it's entirety. As usual you take something out of context and go with it. Pathetic.

The unemployment rate in 2001 was 3.9% It is also true that about 2 million MORE workers came into the work force then jobs created since 2001. It is also true, living wage jobs are a growing peoblem and fewer jobs include health and retirement benefits today then in 2001!

The unemployment rate in this country is very low. No matter how you spin it and try to convince people otherwise. Why don't you just admit you want a welfare state where the government takes care of everyone?

Why don't you go live in one of these countries at the top of the list and complain?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-B/lab_une_rat

It is also true, living wage jobs are a growing peoblem and fewer jobs include health and retirement benefits today then in 2001!

You sound like a John Kerry campaign ad.

ob Quality: Kerry's bases his claim that today's jobs pay $9,000 less that jobs that were lost on averages calculated by the liberal Economic Policy Institute, but even EPI's numbers don't back up what Kerry says. The EPI computes averages for a few broad industries, not a comparison of specific jobs lost compared to new jobs. No such figures exist. And as we showed in one of our articles, comparing a larger number of job categories -- accounting for 154 different types of work within industries -- produces a finding that contradicts Kerry's claim. Those figures show higher-paying occupations growing faster than lower-paying occupations. But these are also averages that don't compare specific jobs lost with specific new jobs. The fact is there's no agreement among economists as to whether new jobs are worse or better, let alone what the pay difference might be, despite what Kerry keeps saying.