Thanks for the clarification about it being over ten years. You are still giving the professor too much credit, though - if he’d said what you’re saying, he’d be right, or at least it’d be debatable, but the words the OP quoted were rather different.
“Politics makes strange bedfellows”.
I think we ALL know this and shouldn’t be surprised by what the prospect of power can do to people. Just choose to live honestly, treat people well and good things will come to you.
Gyrate:
Well clearly I misread the question…and that’s fine. It’s called human error.
As for the issue at hand, I don’t have an issue with our President’s desire to see the deficit decrease. I think ALL Presidents of the modern era have tried to make that happen. NOR do I have an issue with his desire to see the rich pay additional taxes to make it happen. Truth be told, we both know that the government is set up in a way that isn’t designed to bring economic equality to all. Not to mention, the consistent partisan bickering won’t allow the President to pass much anyway to even effectively address this issue.
You might want to read the thread again, but more closely. The OP was complaining that his professor told him that increasing taxes on the rich would not make the deficit disappear, nor would it reduce the national debt.
The problem is that this statement is true. Increasing taxes on the rich to levels that Obama and Co. suggested will not eliminate the deficit nor reduce the national debt. Making the rich pay additional taxes will not “make it happen”.
My argument is that the statement contained in the OP is true and correct. Eliminating the deficit should be done mostly by spending cuts, so please try not to put words in my mouth.
Anyone feel free to start a new discussion about this with a new thread, more than likely in Great Debates.
This one is slightly old, has an OP that is now banned, and is mostly no longer relevant…so I’m going to close it.