First off, its spelled "Hypocrisy" 

Beyond that, if tax rates have changed dramatically over the years and revenues have not changed significantly in response to that (and most of the variability in tax revenue relates to economic output) what does that tell you about the effectiveness of tax increases at increasing tax revenue?

Since you wanted the Federal chart:

As you can see the same pattern emerges ...

If it was tax-cuts that were leading to deficits, wouldn't you expect to see tax revenue falling while government spending stayed stable? Being that the complete opposite pattern exists what does that tell you about your theory?

In the short run (a few years) tax revenues may be impacted by tax rates, but they trend towards the average as the increase/decrease in money in the economy has its impact on spending and investment.

Lower corporate and income taxes lead to greater economic growth and higher wages, which translate into higher tax revenues; higher corporate and personal income taxes lead to lower economic growth and lower wages, which translate into lower tax revenues.

That is what I am talking about, a few years of going back to the 90s tax rate levels, as well as taxing income AS income , combined with intelligent spending cuts to defense and medicare, to create a surplus and payoff debt (reducing long term spending in debt interest) then FUND tax cuts with surplus revenue.

The debt and deficit issue cannot be fixed by spending cuts alone.

And lower tax rates do not equate to economic growth:

Give me a break, it is nearly 1 AM here and I am exhausted, how does attacking spelling forward any sort of point on the issue.

Let's use the same data format shall we, as going back 250 years is sure to skew the results:

And part of the big 2009 jump can be attributed to a nearly $500 billion reduction in GDP from the recession.

As you can see, there has not been a significant spending increase in really the last 30 years.

Yes, and as far as I'm aware the heavily regulated leftist state is working to solve the problem and slowly making progress since 2003. Anyway besides the point, it was simply an illustration of what can happen without the government working to redistribute wealth.

You're right that simply changing to free health care in the USA would not solve the underlying problems. Cutting medicare spending won't solve them either, it would only help with the budget short term. Slow reform is the only option, something that's not a popular sell nowadays.

And don't get me wrong, I don't think that the problem can solved by tax "increases" (ie, letting temporary tax cuts expire that are SUPPOSED to expire) Cuts need to be made in spending too, but not just from entitlements (really Social Security doesn't need to be touched at all, medicare and defense should be the first targets)

But the key to both long term growth and responsible budgeting is in the growth and increase spending and investment power of the middle class, which will not happen by reducing rich people's taxes.

The tax cuts within the United States did not translate into significant economic growth because they weren't the right taxes to cut (the corporate tax rate in the United States is remarkably punitive), there was a massive increase in regulatory burden which cancelled out any benefits from the tax cuts, and the rapid (uncontrolled) growth in the government crowded out growth in the private sector. To make matters worse, the United States has experienced substantial economic pressures for decades that have been poorly responded to which have acted as a drag on economic growth; primarily, the issue is that goods and services made in the United States are becoming increasingly uncompetitive and pseudo-governmental bodies have responded by ensuring cheap consumer credit to drive economic growth through consumption.

The problems in the United States obviously cannot be solved by cutting spending alone, but spending cuts much more dramatic than the ones you've listed are needed (the federal government needs to cut over $1 trillion), tax revenues should be increased by eliminating deductions and simplifying the tax code, a major regulatory overhaul is needed, the federal reserve needs to stop manipulating interest rates to create artificial growth, all pseudo-governmental bodies (like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) should be closed, the education system needs to be fixed starting by eliminating federal involvement, and there needs to be a cultural shift towards preventative healthcare rather than treatment.

The net result should be a government that has been reduced to a level that can easily be paid for through tax revenues, that has a lightweight but effective regulatory system, has no questionable involvement in the economy (in particular the financial sector), has a simple tax structure that is paid by all citizens, and the health of the nation improves while costs of maintaining that health decline.

Wrong,

Tax cuts did not stimulate the economy because they were not designed to stimulate the economy.  Their intent was to "starve the beast" and it is a well documented political startegy endorsed and practiced by reagan, w. bush, and those currently using it to try to shrink government (Sarah Palin and the tea party folks)

Also, if social security was eliminated today, it would worsen the deficit issue in the country, not improve it.

If anything the last few years should have taught us is that corporate profits do not equate to job creation and economic growth.  The largest employing sectors of the economy are also small businesses, which are NOT hit by any massive regulatory burdens (I should know, I own one,) and the lack of sufficent regulation is what caused the credit default swapping and sale of toxic securities which caused the financial meltdown in late 2008.

The reason US made goods have become uncompetative is largely due to a shrinking middle class, which can no longer afford to play the role the must for a successful capitalism system, which is "voting with their wallet."  With their wallet empty, they have little choice but to buy cheap crap made by slave labor in china.

So your proposal is to increase the tax rates on the lower and middle classes (by eliminating tax deductions, and having people who can't pay for food not pay taxes) and lowering taxes on corporations and the rich?  Certain path towards conomic collapse.  Increased taxes on the consumer classes will decrease consumer spending, decrease hirings, decrease corporate profits, and kill the economy.

I do agree we need a focus on preventative care, but that is impossible when a huge chunk of the population is uninsured, has no preventative care, and can't afford to even go to the doctor for a checkup, opting for urgent care facilities for things that should be handled by a primary physician.

I am a moderate, with the opinion that the government should be reduced in size but must be done so responsibly.  I can see I am wasting my breath as you have drank the right wing cool aide and simply spout conservative talking points widely disproven by actual fatcs and logic.

Time for bed and to bow out of this dead end conversation.

Anyone else think that the USA should cut its military aid budget significantly?

Lol, no.