If lowering taxes and raising the debt is good for America Then lowering wages and increasing credit card debt

Question

MUST BE GOOD FOR AMERICANS.

WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER RIGHT.

Answer 1

Ugh no. I shudder to think what will happen to people in 20 years. The ones with massive credit card debt because they are obsessed with presenting the perfect have it all image to the world. The ones who take out adjustable rate mortgages on houses they cant really afford because society says in order to be successful and look it you have to have the biggest toys. The ones with no savings or retirement because even though they make good salaries they still live beyond their means as opposed to living below and thinking for the future.
But its all worth it to have that 60in HDTV right? I mean no interest till 2008 who can resist that deal?

Answer 2

Unfortunately, the Federal governemnt is the only institution that can continually spend money it doesn't have. City cannot do it, counties or states, neither can we the individual do such a thing. However the Federal governement can continually print money or ask for bond purchase with seeming impunity.

The problem we face is that since the civil war we have turned our back on Hamilton's idea that this nation can not succeed without being able to pay off its debts. The government and the public have enjoyed a quality of life which it is not willing to sacrifice. Of course we have never truly had the monetary assets to support such a way of life.

If you were a politician whose goal is to get elected/re-elected would you be the one to say "America, in order for us to balance the books there are many sacrifices that much be made that will greatly depriciate the lifestyle that you have come accustomed to and hard times are ahead."? In today's America with today's Americans you wouldn't have a snowballs chance in hell of getting anywhere near the office you campaigned for. So for now irresponsible speanding is the flavor of the moment.

Of course we all know that if we do not fix the problem volutarily when our economy fails and the safety net that is our government falls, the ramifications of so much incurred debt will destroy our way of life to the man. But people are short sited and politicians live for re-election. Tis the way of the world until we the people wake up.

Answer 3

Not equivalent. One cannot compare a nation to a family, logically, rationally or otherwise.

Lowering taxes that are too high is good for the economy, regardless of the short-term effects on tax receipts. This has been found true every time it has occurred. Because the lowering of receipts can incur a budget deficit, it does not make it a necessarily bad thing.

It was not the cuts, but the huge increases in spending that incurred the majority of the debt. Tack on the recession that started in 2000 and the economic impact of 9/11, and you were looking at a budget deficit anyway, and a struggling economy to boot.

But you act as if debt is evil, when it is not. Consider the fact that most people incur huge debts when they buy their homes and cars, and pay them off over years based on their incomes. Are you saying this is a bad thing? The fact is, this personal debt is a good thing.

So, other than highlighting your lack of knowledge of economics and fiscal policy, what's your point?

Answer 4

You need a fundamental understanding of governement and economics my brother.

Lowering taxes is good for america. More money in the markplace allows for more consumtion and investment, yielding a greater ROI, and creating wealth. With more wealth created, more total tax dollars are returned to the government, with still allowing a lower percentage of those dollars to be in the hands of the government, and allowing a greater percentage to be in the hands of the people.

Take for example the capital gains tax. When Clinton allowed the capital gains tax to go to 20%, we colleted less total dollars in tax than we have now with it at 15%. This would qualify in the language as a tax cut, but that cut yielded greater revenue to the government. Check out the CBO and see for yourself.

Lower taxes have direct and indirect benefits to the people, to the marketplace, and to the government.

You are right that increased debt is bad for the government, but only insomuch as that debt is borrowed from non-bond sources. Bond sourced debt is good for a country, because it is like selling stock when you run a company. People buy bonds to invest in America, and get a return on that investment when their bond matures. Bond natured debt is good for America because it means we have growth capital outside of the reciprocity relationship of the people and the state. Debt bowwored agaist future revenue is bad, and hurts America.

For example, the congress raids the Social Secutiry Insurance fund, and uses the money to fund welfare, bombers, or whaterever. That is akin to GM raiding the pension fund of its employees to launch new product lines.

The problem with your analysis is that both the dems and the reps raid SSI and other funds. Blame both parties for revenue based debt, but understand that tax cuts are a benefit to the nation and her people.

Answer 5

Lowering taxes and raising spending is one of my biggest objections to neo-conservatism. It doesn't make any sense. An old-school conservative would never have done this.

Sure, lowering taxes stimulates private spending, but it only makes sense if matched by government spending cuts. Otherwise, it's idiotic. This is yet another brilliant move by Bush.

Answer 6

What is good for America is lowering taxes and lowering spending. Debt is not good for a nation, nor an individual.

Answer 7

Yes, I like this answer. But alas, I am fiscally conservative, and don't prefer to live my life that way

Answer 8

Wrong

Answer 9

You mean government debt isn't a good thing????

Then how would we pay for all of the entitlement programs that the socialist party had engineered?

Answer 10

Right, if your initials are GOP