Personally, at this point I really don't think anyone should get tax cuts. I'm usually a fiscal conservative, but with the national debt increasing by the second and the bailout bill, I just can't comprehend a tax cut. Right now, we need to reduce spending, this includes cutting defense spending by at least 20%, and forget about tax cuts. It also wouldn't be a bad time to legalize and tax marijuana.

I'm not an economic major, but I don't understand how we can afford to tax as low as we do and keep spending like this. Republicans talk about reducing spending when the majority of it goes towards defense. I'm all for a strong military, but there's not need to spend more than the rest of world combined on it. I also don't like all the government programs the Democrats support.

Right now, we need to bite the bullet and pay our taxes.

Personally, at this point I really don't think anyone should get tax cuts. I'm usually a fiscal conservative, but with the national debt increasing by the second and the bailout bill, I just can't comprehend a tax cut. Right now, we need to reduce spending, this includes cutting defense spending by at least 20%, and forget about tax cuts. It also wouldn't be a bad time to legalize and tax marijuana.

I'm not an economic major, but I don't understand how we can afford to tax as low as we do and keep spending like this. Republicans talk about reducing spending when the majority of it goes towards defense. I'm all for a strong military, but there's not need to spend more than the rest of world combined on it. I also don't like all the government programs the Democrats support.

Right now, we need to bite the bullet and pay our taxes.


yeah pretty much.
Only thing is that now the US economy is so fucked that there's no room to move in any direction.

Raising taxes is all well and good, but you're allready headed for recession, ditto for cutting spending. The time to do that was when things were at least close to sailing smoothly. Post sub prime it's probably too late.

Can't use expansionary monetary policy to try and keep things going in the mean time inflation's allready at 5% and if it gets too high the value of the dollar could be so badly eroded that the arabs dump it and switch to the euro, or just as bad - that other countries dump it from their currency reserves.
Even announcing a heavilly expansionary monetary policy could trigger bad things.

It doesn't take an economist to tell that you can't keep borrowing and keep spending indefinitely.
You have common sense, congradulations :)
Unfortunately it seems that the US congress doesn't.

(appologies for spelling, stuck on a computer without firefox)

Since Reagan, the majority of the increases in national debt have occurred under Republican presidencies. Only Clinton managed to start paying down the debt.

If you want reckless, irresponsible economics, vote GOP.

Hmyeah, neo-cons have bigger plans than cutting the debt, ie bloating the MI-Complex.

Government has never been about efficiency or "the right thing to do". Politics is a game of wits; you throw bones to your base (the ones that loooooove tax cuts) and attack your opponent incessantly (4 more years of GWB). If Obama didn't call for middle-class tax cuts, McCain would; this is competition, after all.

Since Reagan, the majority of the increases in national debt have occurred under Republican presidencies. Only Clinton managed to start paying down the debt.

If you want reckless, irresponsible economics, vote GOP.

Be honest here. Its Congress that allows for spending. Its Congress that raises the debt ceiling. Any one of the Congressional members can filibuster or bring the publics attention to a spending Bill. There are numerous things each individual can do to stop a Bill. Congress has always been made of both Republicans and Democrats. None of this spending gets passed without support from both parties. If a spending bill does, thats just political suicide for the next round of elections.

Be honest here. Its Congress that allows for spending. Its Congress that raises the debt ceiling. Any one of the Congressional members can filibuster or bring the publics attention to a spending Bill. There are numerous things each individual can do to stop a Bill. Congress has always been made of both Republicans and Democrats. None of this spending gets passed without support from both parties. If a spending bill does, thats just political suicide for the next round of elections.

And with elections every 2 years the campaigning never ends.

Government has never been about efficiency or "the right thing to do". Politics is a game of wits; you throw bones to your base (the ones that loooooove tax cuts) and attack your opponent incessantly (4 more years of GWB). If Obama didn't call for middle-class tax cuts, McCain would; this is competition, after all.

Yeah, honestly though, I hope that whoever gets elected has the balls to go against what they said and not cut taxes because it's what we need right now. The American people need to look past the short term for a second and look at the long term implications.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm

It's an article about the candidates tax plans and how they effect the national debt.

Be honest here. Its Congress that allows for spending. Its Congress that raises the debt ceiling. Any one of the Congressional members can filibuster or bring the publics attention to a spending Bill. There are numerous things each individual can do to stop a Bill. Congress has always been made of both Republicans and Democrats. None of this spending gets passed without support from both parties. If a spending bill does, thats just political suicide for the next round of elections.

The President has veto power. If they were against spending they could veto.

The President has veto power. If they were against spending they could veto.

Sure they can, but then they'll have to explain to the idiotic American Public why they vetoed a Bill called "The Happy Ponies and Birthday Clowns Act". Spending Bills are always called something positive. Their names usually have nothing to do with what they are for. The American public has a history of "Its called the Patriot Act. You are a damned commie if you vote against it. We must protect our constitution as patriots against all enemies!"

The first step is to eliminate pork spending. End of story.

The first step is to eliminate pork spending. End of story.

You could just cut back on military spending instead.

You could just cut back on military spending instead.
That too.

I can't say I'm particularly fond of spending billions of dollars pursuing an ignored and malformed foreign policy that has cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers and our national reputation abroad.

However, that's not to say I'm not for the funding of a technologically superior standing army.

Furthermore, government waste needs to be reduced. Over a six year period beginning slightly more than a decade ago, the Department of Defense purchased 270,000 airline tickets which later went unused at a cost of $100,000,000 to taxpayers, and failed to seek refunds for these fully refundable fares. And that's just one example!

I'm also for the elimination of subsidies concerning several industries, most notably the energy sector which contains multiple companies earning billions every quarter in profit.

I still stand by my statement to eliminate government funding for stupid shit.

That too.

I can't say I'm particularly fond of spending billions of dollars pursuing an ignored and malformed foreign policy that has cost the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers and our national reputation abroad.

However, that's not to say I'm not for the funding of a technologically superior standing army.

Furthermore, government waste needs to be reduced. Over a six year period beginning slightly more than a decade ago, the Department of Defense purchased 270,000 airline tickets which later went unused at a cost of $100,000,000 to taxpayers, and failed to seek refunds for these fully refundable fares. And that's just one example!

I'm also for the elimination of subsidies concerning several industries, most notably the energy sector which contains multiple companies earning billions every quarter in profit.

I still stand by my statement to eliminate government funding for stupid shit.

I agree with you there. There was a scandal earlier this year with the thousands of government workers here in washington dc using government credit cards for all their personal needs like shopping, dining etc. Shame I didn't keep a copy. It was on the washington post. The numbers were staggering.

Other things are more fuzzy though on whether they're waste or not. In one of the debates mccain was saying some shit about a 3 million dollar projector, which is 1) anti science considering the planetarium would be hosting hundreds/thousands of students. and 2) Illinois gets less back from the federal government than it pays.

2) Illinois gets less back from the federal government than it pays.

There's a general tendency for this to happen in the blue states.

There's a general tendency for this to happen in the blue states.

This is the thing that gets me the most too. People who vote Republican in red states are always on about their taxes being given to others who don't deserve it, yet its those from the states that went blue that have the tax burden of paying for the infrastructure of the red states. I don't know maybe its a perfect relationship. The generous, giving blue states and the greedy, needy red states.

This is the thing that gets me the most too. People who vote Republican in red states are always on about their taxes being given to others who don't deserve it, yet its those from the states that went blue that have the tax burden of paying for the infrastructure of the red states. I don't know maybe its a perfect relationship. The generous, giving blue states and the greedy, needy red states.

Redistribution of wealth doesn't work, man!