Washington Post Fact Checker Questions Paul's plans.

[ConstantineX]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The individual income tax accounts for about $1.3T out of a total Federal budget of $3T. Removing it would leave you with a budget of $1.7T, the Federal budget of 1999. Your mileage might vary, but not by much.


[/ QUOTE ]

See here you talk about income (tax-revenue) in 2008, and that the 1999 budget which would be covered by tax-revenue excluding revenue from the income tax. If your 1999 budget is not adjusted for inflation those numbers dont add up, because 1.7T in 1999 might be =2T now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Inflation is irrelevent.

Let's say that in 1999 I spent $100 on food, clothing, and shelter, and another $100 on hookers and blow, for a total of $200 in 1999.

Now, 8 years later, due to inflation, I am spending $200 on food, clothing, and shelter, and another $200 on hookers and blow, for a total of $400 in 2007.

Then I decide I don't need to spend on hookers and blow anymore, and can cave $200, leaving a total of $200 in 2007.

Hence I can return to 1999 spending levels by cutting current spending despite inflation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh comeon. You are missing the essential argument that one being subconsciously raised when arguing for "returning to 1999 spending levels". Why the hell would we be cared about nominal dollars raised? The argument is about raising the same amount of real wealth in 1999 to fund the government.

[/ QUOTE ]

NO IT ISN'T.

Jumping Jesus Christ, how can so many people miss the frigging point so completely? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

We're talking about cutting a trillion dollars in spending NOW. That leaves us at the same NOMINAL spending level of X years ago when the stuff that we would be cutting NOW was still being bought.

How is this difficult to understand?

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

$100 for 1 unit of food, clothing, and shelter, and $100 for hookers and blow in 1999. Now it's $200 for 1 unit of food, clothing and shelter and $200 for hookers and blow in 2007. Inflation (100%), right?

So I cut $200 proportionally from my budget to "return to 1999 spending levels". So now I spend $100 dollars for 0.5 units of food, and $100 for 0.5 units of hookers and blow in 2007.

What I am missing here in saying the government has less real wealth (100% less)?