Every year we dig ourselves deeper in debt, it becomes more difficult to avoid default in the future. In other words, yes, we're not immediately on the verge of defaulting, but we are past the point where the debt grows faster than our economy.
Every year we ignore the debt, our entire society loses more wealth. If we address the debt now, sure we might increase unemployment by 2%, but if we wait 3 more years, it might take an increase of 4% in unemployment to fix the mess. There is absolutely no advantage to waiting. The only reason the Democrats want to wait is because they don't want to admit that their ideology has doomed us, so they'll continue to deny it all well beyond the point of economic collapse.
You're distorting the position of the left, I think. They would like to fix our current budgetary problems by a combination of taxation and spending cuts, rather than the Tea Party's bizarre solution of gutting social services and instituting a more regressive tax regime.
A while? It's been a couple of weeks. Just how fast do you think the economy moves, anyway?
As far as low taxes helping, we've had a historically low tax burden ever since the Bush years. If it was supposed to generate jobs, where are they? You people never acknowledge that you ALREADY had the lowest taxes since the end of WWII, and that they weren't helping.
But when did we last have budget surpluses? Gee, let me think...
amorphously defined 'rich' It's not amorphously defined. It's defined as $250,000 a year and up.
And tell me how the 'bizarre' solution of both tax and spending cuts would not work. It's not bizarre. We've advocated for a balanced solution consisting of new revenues and spending cuts. It's the Teapublicans who've advocated no tax hikes and harmful spending cuts.