[1pg]I'll say it again: if no one is going to increase taxes on the wealthy (including unearned income, inherited assets, etc), then they aren't serious about the budget.

I'll say it: if no one is going to increase taxes on the upper-middle class that would never consider themselves wealthy (including higher marginal rates and reducing common deductions like mortgage deductions), they aren't serious about the budget.

[BHM] And I'll say it again: if no one is going to show some spending restraint, then they aren't serious about the budget.

I'll say it: if "spending restraint" doesn't include cutting military sending, Social Security, and Medicare spending, then they aren't serious about the budget, either.

I don't care which party it is.

Our kinda-sorta long-term baseline budget deficit is about $1-1.5 dollars. It ballooned well above that for a few years because of some significant one-off coronavirus spending, but that's going to wane after this budget year. You can't close that hole with taxes on the wealthy. And you can't close that hole with reducing non-defense, non-discretionary spending.

If you're serious about the budget, that means that both tax increases for families earning less than $400K and changes to military and SS/Medicare spending have to be on the table. That's how we know neither party is serious about the budget.