If the big "fear" about electing a democrat is higher taxes, then how do Repubs plan to pay for the war?

Answer 1

They don't plan on paying for it, after they lose the election and the democrats raise taxes to pay for all the republicans debt, the republicans can claim they are for lower taxes and fiscal responsibility again.

Answer 2

This question assumes facts not in evidence, in other words, your question is based on a false premise.

The big fear about electing a Democrat into the Presidency assumes that Democrats also have this fear. Clearly this is not true. Furthermore, you assume that Republicans (or more correctly, non-Democrats) fear a Democrat President simply because he will raise taxes. Although this would be bad, this is not the main fear.

Americans fear a lack of safety and security. Americans fear a loss in their way of life. Everything else is secondary. People fear that a Democrat would be weak on national security, border control, and the military, not to mention the Global War on Terrorism (a misnomer; this should have been called the Global War on Terrorists.) This fear is based on past history and current dialog from the Democrats themselves.

Everytime a Democrat brings up Viet Nam, people cringe at the thought that calamities such as those that followed our withdrawl from the Asian arena would occur again, and we would be responsible. Democrats fear that anything bad that would happen on "their watch" to this country would automatically be blamed on them and their faulty policies (and they would be correct.)

This weakness, perceived or real, translates into appeasement or outright surrender to those (enemies) who oppose us and seek our destruction.

In other words, Democrats are not to be trusted with the safety and national security of the United States.

As to how to pay for the war, we pay TRILLIONS of dollars a year in taxes. We obviously have enough to pay for the entire military budget AND the war, plus all the other government agencies. That people may not LIKE that we spent about half a trillion dollars on these operations is a seperate issue.

There are plenty of areas where we can make real cuts, though, such as in the elimination of Social Security and replace it with real medical savings plans, and make real changes, such as in the Flat Tax or the Fair Tax, in which budgets would be based on an approximate known quantity instead of a guesstimation.

We shall see where we go in this next election.

Answer 3

The American electorate has no big fear of higher taxes. For the vast majority of voters, that is not a deciding factor when casting a ballot.

As for paying for national defense, to protect the lives and property of American citizens, a proposed $650 billion for fiscal year 2008 represents 4.4% of GDP.

Given current Congressional spending trends, the federal deficit will continue to grow. The growth of the deficit will not be constrained, in any significant way, by any increase (or decrease) in receipts.

Answer 4

i do no longer understand why reducing taxes on one type and levying somewhat extra on yet another is seen wealth distribution? merely by using fact the middle type is getting a wreck ability that we are giving them "handouts"? to enhance taxes is a complicated financial subject that even the better of politicians do no longer understand, and that i understand i've got not got a thoroughly corporation concept on them the two. What i understand is that a tax decrease for the middle type could advance intake that's what our monetary device is provided on. optimistically it may additionally improve reductions costs so our banks could have enjoyed ones capital particularly of being bailed out by means of Abu Dhabi. Does this inevitably recommend that we ought to consistently levee extra on the wealthy? No. It ability our government has replace right into a bloated turkey by using particularly, particularly undesirable accounting. the element approximately Senate elections is which you're picking one persons. You and that i've got not got the solutions to all of it and we actual have not got an Accounting degree coupled with a Masters in worldwide monetary device. they do no longer particularly understand the two. There comes a element whilst there are such numerous regulation on the books and such numerous loopholes that have been configured into the present tax code, that it is going to be wiped sparkling.... completely sparkling and initiate over. it particularly is the only thank you to get everywhere in this subject.

Answer 5

The war's being paid for out of the current budget. The budget's running a deficit, of course.

The assumption is that either other programs will be cut to pay off the bonds, or, more optimistically, that tax revenues will rise as the economy grows, allowing the bonds to be paid off without cutting other programs. Raising taxes or rolling the debt over would be possible, as well, of course.

Answer 6

To the idiot above Reagonomics was a failed policy, as a matter of fact Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 account for no only the largest growth in Government but 70% of the deficit spending in the last 30 years

Answer 7

The Republicans are going to pay for the war by eliminating all domestic social programs and entitlements! It infuriates me that President Bush intends to ask Congress to provide 190 billion dollars for the War in Iraq next year and is also going to veto legislation to provide health insurance for needy American children because it "costs too much" and will lead to the "federalization of the health care system"! How can he sleep at night?? Sleeping medication, no doubt!!

Answer 8

Raising taxes has almost always proven to be a bad idea. Low taxes result is higher discretionary spending that produces more jobs which produces more tax revenue. This is a proven fact, lowering taxes during the Reagan era actually resulted in higher tax revenues. The same is true of the Bush tax cuts. However when Bush SR raised taxes the country slipped into a recession as spending slowed. Now before all you left wing liberals begin deriding me, it was John Kennedy who first came up with this idea and it worked when he did it as well.

Answer 9

What I love most is seeing people use math to lie. Taxs cuts work when you add in the fact that the elected leaders pool money from other areas to show a number that sounds great to the American people. This is the number one reason the roads in Texas look like crap!

Answer 10

Great question. Reduction of social services still would not pay for the deficit.

Da Beards: Don't just good it, but actually read about Reaganomics. It didn't work out that way.