> It is possible to get there again with the right economy and a President and Congress that isn't starting endless wars or passing more tax cuts or dealing with a bank caused or a pandemic caused financial crisis.

We don't necessarily need to prevent tax cuts so long as spending cuts outpace them. The US tax rate is already absolutely absurd. I don't keep one cent I earn until Easter on an annualized basis.

All we need to do is radically cut federal (and hopefully state) spending.

Cool. Either cut the military budget or reform medicare. I think the best way to save money is probably to pass a constitutional amendment for death with dignity and allow old people to place irrevocable 'when I can't decide for myself anymore off me' status on their medical directives and shield providers who abide by it from lawsuits by the family. Not only do we torture people with continued medical treatments way past the ability for the patient to regain any quality of life because of fear of lawsuits and the family being unable to let go, but we do it blatantly disregarding explicit directives from the patient and we do it at a substantial cost. I am terrified of this happening to me and everyone should be if they think about it, but people are afraid to think about or discuss end of life decisions. There is also a sizable religious movement which opposes letting people make their own choice about this.

But that is never going to happen so let's keep spending trillions of dollars keeping old people alive against their will and cutting taxes for people who don't need it. Most middle class families would benefit more from massively subsidized tuition to secondary educational institutes or loan forgiveness than the tax cuts which would pass.

We could also fund the IRS more so they can actually go after people who avoid taxes with convoluted schemes and attorneys because right now they don't bother and rely on taking most of the income from the middle class who pay the most and don't fight back.

Your argument boils down to:

1. Cut military spending

Fine by me. That's an easy spending reduction.

2. Reduce end of life medical spending

In a public sense, sure. But I see no reason to force privately insured or paying patients to die prematurely if it's against their wishes.

> and allow old people to place irrevocable 'when I can't decide for myself anymore off me' status on their medical directives

We already have legal basis for this; no constitutional amendment required. They are called Advance Directives, and a lawyer can help set it up. You get to describe in detail your wishes for care and nominate someone to execute them on your behalf.

3. Tax more

This needs to happen across the board now that we've firmly extended ourselves beyond our means. It should never have been allowed to get so bad.

> and cutting taxes for people who don't need it > rely on taking most of the income from the middle class who pay the most and don't fight back

Higher income earners will always pay more under the current schedule, but I see no reason to steal all of their money.

> Most middle class families would benefit more from massively subsidized tuition to secondary educational institutes or loan forgiveness than the tax cuts which would pass

We're trying to save money. This talks about spending more by providing education. Thankfully it is unconstitutional for the federal gov to provide education (not that it is currently stopping them).

Additionally, loan forgiveness is massively biased towards the wealthy. Only folks that thought a college degree had more reward than risk pursued them, and forgiving loans only helps those that delay repaying their debt or cannot afford to do so.

The real way to fix education expenses is to remove gov guaranteed loans and push them back to the private sector. Only then will costs come down as students will not be able to get a loan if there is no reasonable chance of repayment.

> We could also fund the IRS more so they can actually go after people who avoid taxes with convoluted schemes and attorneys

If you want to change laws, this is where your focus should be. If it's legal to reduce one's tax burden, then one should. I would argue it's their duty as a taxpayer to do so. Anyone is welcome to donate extra to the IRS. They'll never turn you down.

> But I see no reason to force privately insured or paying patients to die prematurely if it's against their wishes.

When did I ever even imply that? Please read thoughtfully.

> We already have legal basis for this; no constitutional amendment required. They are called Advance Directives, and a lawyer can help set it up.

Sorry, doesn't work. At all. I recommend asking a nurse working in a critical care unit how much those directives actually mean. In practice they are completely worthless because the hospital and doctors will do whatever will have the least chance of getting them sued -- which means they will listen to the family, and the family is not know for making good decisions in this regard.

Also, you are not allowed to kill yourself and doctors are not allowed to kill you. Remember Kevorkian? He was not killing mentally unwell people -- he was killing terminally ill people who looked forward to agony and despair in the time they had left, and they wanted to go with dignity on their own terms and he got put through the ringer in the courts and the press.

> Higher income earners will always pay more under the current schedule, but I see no reason to steal all of their money.

Is it stealing if the only reason they are able to make money and keep that money and use that money is because they have the protection of law, an infrastructure which works, and a stable monetary system and regulated economy, as well as an army to prevent anyone coming and taking everything from them? If they own a business and someone steals their IP and sells it under a different name, do they not get to utilize the courts and the government to shut that down ? Why should they not have to pay for that, it isn't free?

> Additionally, loan forgiveness is massively biased towards the wealthy. Only folks that thought a college degree had more reward than risk pursued them, and forgiving loans only helps those that delay repaying their debt or cannot afford to do so.

The problem is that every white collar job wants a 4 year degree for entry level work. We either need to bring back an apprenticeship system or we need to walk back the degree inflation or we need to give people options for cheap schools so they don't end up in debt for life. It is completely possible to publicly fund schools and have them be incredibly high quality and cost effective. Ask a European about that.

> If you want to change laws, this is where your focus should be. If it's legal to reduce one's tax burden, then one should. I would argue it's their duty as a taxpayer to do so. Anyone is welcome to donate extra to the IRS. They'll never turn you down.

I never said what they did was legal. I said they hide behind attorneys. If you are repo-ing a vehicle and one of them is on the street and the other is behind a fence with razor wire on it and a guard dog nearby which one will you take first? If you your employer runs of money to pay you to get the other one, then they won by intimidating you, not by having a paid off car.