Geithner - word games galore: he wants those who listen to believe that a "slight" tax on the rich is all that is needed.

Geithner proposes that a “slightly larger” tax burden for the rich will off-set the need to make “unacceptably deep cuts”  in either national security or benefits to middle class senior citizens.  Of course,  this statement simply does not pass the smell test.  National security expenses total nearly 20% of our budget and the entitlement programs of Medicare and Social Security consume another 41% of our budget, together.  To off-set this growing disaster will require much, much more than a “slight” tax burden on the rich. . . . . . . . . . . . . .   obviously.  (cf. facts present at Center on Budget and Policy Priorities).  

In fact,  the Geithner statement is so far removed from the reality of a real solution as to be an intentional lie,  designed to convince the ignorant (folks who do not read conservative blogs) into believing that the rich are being asked to do next to nothing "so why not tax them?"  

As long as Establishment Politicians continue to add to the debt by 40% each and every year,  we cannot solve our problems via “taxing the rich.”  It is simply impossible.   Obama thinks himself to be funny as he argues for taxing the rich,  "This isn't class warfare, its math."    Maybe this Harvard genius should try doing a little first grade drill of his own:  take 40 percent and multiply by 10 (as in 10 years) and what have we done with the debt?   We have increased it by 400%.  And what does Obama have in mind as a solution?  Take it to the bank,  there is no solution for this,  other than committing to the "unacceptable" cuts in areas that Geithner pretends to be most concerned about.  

Suggestion:  Why not make the necessary cuts,  let things “settle down,"   reform the tax code to suit the new and reduced budget,  and move on from there,  since “slightly taxing the rich” is an idiot’s promise and no solution at all? 

"That’s the kind of balance you need.    Why is that the case? Because if you don't try to generate more revenues through tax reform, if you don't ask, you know, the most fortunate Americans to bear a slightly larger burden of the privilege of being an American, then you have to -- the only way to achieve fiscal sustainability is through unacceptably deep cuts in benefits for middle class seniors, or unacceptably deep cuts in national security."