Tax increase should be Prioritized over spending cuts

Now we must look into the many Miss-conceptions of my opponents caseIn his first contention, he talks about about how "Tax's will harm America in the long run", however, this is a total false hood. He stated that "it will cut the deficit by $500 Billion", but if we look to Paul Krugman, Noble Prize Winner in Economics, we see him projecting "Spending cuts will only create a $300 Billion revenue by cutting NECCICARY programs within our government". My opponents then says "if we prioritize tax's, our economy will be in another recession", but once again a miss-conception. We are in the mess we are in now from cuts in the past and tax reductions. .. We have never seen tax's within an economy hurt, like in my case when I talk about how the Clinton Administrations tax increase was the reason for our surplus. We can also look to other countries. On the website Forbes. com, we see countries like Belgium (with a 54% tax rate), Finland (with a 49% tax rate), and Germany(with a 45% tax rate). these countries also have the highest GDPs in the world, ranking in the 8th,14th, and 18th places. The last MAJOR miss-conception is "Employment". my opponent would like to make you think employment will go up and unemployment will go down to 5.5%, as he stated in his case, however, this is not true, once again. In my case,from the Heritage Foundation it affirms “Social Security allows working people to retire with at least a minimal income. If this is cut many could not retire for many more years (if ever), which would increase the unemployment rate because their jobs would not open up. The same is true as the retirement age is increased -- fewer job openings. ”Now my opponents 2nd and 3rd Contention are in the same boat, trying to say we have un-neccisary spending, however that spending creates American jobs no matter what it is. An example of this is in my opponents case by "Eliminating the Advanced Technology Project", which saves only $2.5 billion, compared to $1.6 Trillion from tax increase. If we "Eliminate" this project we will "Eliminate" American jobs, which will only harm social programs, the economy, and everyone even more. Another example is "spending cuts to the Military" as my opponent has proposed. first off, cutting this spending may help generate a billion dollars in revenue, it is still not worth destroying jobs and putting OUR country in harms way when tax increase will generate 100x more money. Second off, the Jobs and the way the military spending helps in every aspect of life. Even if you don't think the military effects YOU as a person, it does, because there are manufacturers of military machinery, which in return they get paid from the government and spend it at YOUR local store, which YOU get paid with. .. All and all, every piece of money the government hands out to programs, small, big, un-neccisary, or neccisary, it all gets circulated and is the reason we can sustain normality in life within our nation this moment. So, that turns all government spending into a neccisary process in which the government must participate in to survive, and I feel for ALL these reasons, and many more, that my opponents has no idea what a TRUE tax increase will do, and what a TRUE spending cut will destroy. Thank you for your time, back to you CON!