Let's see... would you rather have somebody that runs up the budget and gives it to the little guy, or somebody who runs up the budget and gives it to the big guy? Despite what they say, neither party is for smaller government, but at least one is truthful about it.
With a combination of higher taxes for the most prosperous among us, and believe me they live like modern day royalty, and cut backs in the military and some social services we can achieve parity. combine that with passive revenue streams dedicated to paying down the gov't deficit, and requiring the Fed to raise interest rates by 2 percent we will see a much stronger dollar and lower debt. Social services, universal healthcare can run at a small loss.
Wow, maybe we should elect you for President, since you have it all figured out, wait, I take that back. At least you present your bias in your opening sentence by hating the wealthy. Here are the facts. Use these to reach your "parity":
""" Over an adjusted gross income threshold of $200,000 — lower than the $250,000 that signifies "rich" to the Obama administration — total taxable income from all returns was $2.061 trillion in 2008 .... This income generated $531 billion in taxes.
Let's say the top rate had been the Clinton era 39.6% instead of 35%, and the capital gains rate was back to 20%. That would have raised the 2008 tax yield by about $50 billion. Even assuming 2012 incomes are higher than in the recession year of 2008, these rate hikes don't add up to serious deficit relief."""
Here is the other key for your answer sheet in reaching "parity":
If you take all of the revenue collected last year in taxes it will only cover Medicare, SS, entitlements and the Federal debt. That's right...no money left for Defense nor all other Federal jobs, gov't agencies, (FEMA, CIA, FBI, etc, etc).
Now you say, raise interest rates by 2% and we will lower debt. Do you not know that when the US raises interest rates it does not happen in a vacuum but that worldwide interest rates are affected? So now our 16.2 Trillion dollar Fed Debt gets tagged another 1-2 points raising our Fed Deficit(that parity thing), another 3.2-1.6 billion/year?
Your closing sentence sums it all up real well:
""Social services, universal healthcare can run at a small loss"""
Define "small", as these are among the highest items in the Fed budget. How do we run these at a loss and reach "parity". Oh wait, you said "cut backs...in...social services". Better re-read that attitude about the wealthy again...
Sorry, you had my vote until I read your post....;-)