This is the thread for the "liberals" to explain how tax cuts = spending

[ig0tm0n3y1nth3b4nk]

both increase the deficit and add to the debt in the exact same way.

[paned*expressions]

Shhhhhhh

[alexthegreat]

A tax cut isn't spending.

The loan incurred during deficit spending when you cut taxes and leave spending at a normal rate is spending. Spending you previously had covered from revenue. When you take away the revenue the unpaid spending goes up.

Tax cuts aren't spending, but they can increase debt.

[crazycabbie16]

Why should a tax cut be measured by its increase in revenue? This is an absurd idea utilized by modern conservatives that i'll never wrap my mind around. Is it not enough that lower taxation allows for greater economic growth? The laffer curve, although true mathematically that in certain circumstances revenues can be increased through tax reduction, the idea that we must increase revenues in order for a tax reduction to be justified is crazy. This is an idea espoused by conservatives, and now being utilized by the left as the measure for success in fiscal policy.. Does it INCREASE the amount of money the government has? If not, then its a failure...

[Angry Little Fairy]

Wait....I know I'm just a simple person in a red state but explain this further.

I'm mandated to pay, say, 15% of my income to the Fed Gov and the Fed Gov turns around and spenRAB it on "X". If taxes are lowered and I am only mandated to send 10% of my income to the Fed Gov, then the Fed Gov has to spend more money to cover the loss of revenue?

If I lose 5% of my income then I scale back expenses to ensure I can pay for what I need to, including interest. You are saying the Gov should not have to scale back as well but should just charge forward without a care in the world?

[1620 military time]

More honest than Spend and Spend Spend and Spend.

[K-LA.]

Today it seems that way. Gov officials think they have done a good job by not overspending the yearly debt increase.

[Wtekal Aooriq]

Basically thats correct. Conservatives want to starve the beast with low taxes, while liberals want feed the neigrabroadors to it.

[LayVoa]

Assuming the U.S. will not default on its debt, yes.

[lmelgirl]

I don't think tax CUTS=spending, but I do think that advantageous tax loopholes that provide specific advantages to one group over another=spending (or more accurately subsidization).

(Hypothetical analogy coming)

Example A: "since it is in our countries best interest for product/service ABC to grow we have implemented a subsidy to ensure that their growth can continue as the technology behind it matures to the point where some day it can be self sufficient"

is pretty much the same as saying:

Example B: "since it is in our countries best interest for product/service ABC to grow we have implemented a tax advantage (cut/loophole/etc) to ensure that their growth can continue as the technology behind it matures to the point where some day it can be self sufficient"

Ultimately, both are given money that would normally be revenue in an effort to sustain their growth (or appease their donors as is often the case)