English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Why don't Republican Politicians believe in balancing the budget?

2007-09-27 05:15:14 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

16 answers

Yes, it is.

2007-09-27 05:18:40 · answer #1 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 1 2

Yes. it is very irresponsible. I just answered a question a second ago about people asking if democrats were going to raise taxes. It's funny that they think social programs are going to raise taxes. The war has cost America over a half a trillion dollars and they want 190 billion more. That would raise our taxes more than additional social programs would but the republicans are just making the defecit huge. I love how Bill Clinton made our defecit the smallest it had ever been and then George W. completely rode on the waves of Clinton's hard work and success and all these republicans think he's great for lowering taxes. Clinton making the deficit smaller has allowed the republicans to go on their irreoponsible spending spree. But yes future generations will have to bite the bullet on this.

2007-09-27 05:22:32 · answer #2 · answered by Eisbär 7 · 0 1

It's pretty tough to balance the budget if you want to run two wars and give the rich huge tax cuts. Deficit spending, within reasonable limits, is not necessarily bad, but you're right, recent Republican administrations seem to have abandoned all fiscal restraint.

One of the Republican's less public agendas is to cut spending on what they call "entitlement" programs - social security, health care, aid for children, school lunches, etc. By forcing a budget crisis, they've had some success in trimming these programs. They would be delighted if the financial crisis they've engineered results in permanent cuts to any of these programs.

2007-09-27 05:22:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

There have only been 2 balanced budgets in over 30 years. Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton and they only had 1 each. My parents generation passed their deficits on to my generation, and my generation will the current deficits onto future generations. To avoid this elect a president and senators and congressmen who will balance the budget. I doubt that it will ever happen.

2007-09-27 05:36:13 · answer #4 · answered by John 6 · 0 1

it is genuine that deficit spending will burden destiny generations because of the fact they are going to could desire to pay for it sooner or later the two with the aid of greater taxes, inflation, or paying interest on borrowed funds. even though, they might possibly pay a lot extra if the financial equipment receives heavily worse. an significant drop in GDP and employment over an prolonged quantity of time will produce much less tax sales and greater government outlays (unemployment, welfare, etc.) additionally becoming a extensive government deficit.

2016-10-20 03:38:35 · answer #5 · answered by carvajal 4 · 0 0

If these were normal circumstances, I'd agree with you but it isn't, we're under a legitimate state of National Emergency. Preserving the Republic is the best we can do for future generations. If the Republic falls and that is a danger, nothing else matters. So, Kwitcherbellyakin.

2007-09-27 05:27:06 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes.

During my formative years in the '80's, Democrats were labelled as "tax and spend". Twenty five years later, I've found the only thing worse than "tax and spend" is "don't tax and spend." At least with the former, there's some sort of implicit acknowledgement that if you are going to spend money, it is up to you to raise the money to spend. With deficit spending, you're just passing the buck (or passing the IOU for the buck).

2007-09-27 05:27:09 · answer #7 · answered by Pythagoras 7 · 0 1

1.) Yes, indeed.

2.) Because Republicans don't believe in a balanced budget, obviously. To do so would mean having to stop inventing new ways to steal from our grandchildren.

2007-09-27 05:23:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

deficit spending and in general spending priorities (spending a trillion dollars on iraq, but threatening to veto health coverage for children) are the primary MORAL issues of this upcoming election...

2007-09-27 05:24:28 · answer #9 · answered by nostradamus02012 7 · 0 0

Yes, they're giving their rich upperclass buddies millions of dollars in tax breaks while borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars in order to fund an arbitrary war that will only benefit the rich. And working class and middle class Americans will be paying for the upper classes current escapades for decades to come. It's time to storm the Bastille.

2007-09-27 05:21:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Sure we can get of rid of wasteful spending like the Pentagon and preemptive wars.

2007-09-27 05:22:30 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers