Tax cuts do not have to be “paid for”

There has been considerable discussion recently in the media outlets about the potential tax reform measures that congress is considering.

When the topic of tax-cuts or reductions comes up we are told that one of the problems is in finding ways to pay for the cuts.  The implication is that some other set of taxes will have to go up.

Not necessary

We don’t need to pay for tax cuts.

The government needs to cut spending so that it is aligned with tax revenue.

They don’t have a guaranteed amount of income.  If congress decides to cut taxes the loss of revenue should be accompanied by a cut in spending.

We deserve better


3 Responses to Tax cuts do not have to be “paid for”

  1. Tickedofftaxpayer says:

    Couldn’t agree more.


  2. Haiduc says:

    Agree but “entitlements” are hard to cut…


  3. Anonymous says:

    A little late responding, but this is so true. Spending needs to be reduced.


Leave a Reply -- you do not have to enter your email address

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: