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

Ron Paul has been called crazy that he wanted to shrink government and stop overseas spending, so what plan do conservatives have to balance the budget?

2007-11-26 12:15:28 · 14 answers · asked by Edge Caliber 6 in Politics & Government Elections

cut spending where?

Military, medicare, social security?

2007-11-26 12:19:44 · update #1

mrs. smith I would have answered except your email is disabled.

2007-11-26 15:17:41 · update #2

14 answers

Cut spending.

2007-11-26 12:18:44 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5 6

Clinton's Democrats lost administration of the Congress 2 yrs into his mandate, as a effect he replaced into snookered in the two the abode and the Senate. a minimum of he did no longer veto each and every little thing in sight, with the Senate no longer having the sixty seven seats to push each and every little thing previous him. most of the measures you describe have been certainly under a republican Congress with Clinton as prez. No funds stability could ever have taken place. Reagan and Bush 40-one had spent lots funds and created lots debt and deficit, that replaced into impossible and nevertheless is on the instant. The 'prosperous' paid what they have been meant to with each and every of the loopholes and fancy-schwanzy tax shelters that they had up the ying-yang. Bush 40 3 decreased their taxes - what a comedian tale - 'trickle-down' economics have in no way labored, everywhere !! All Obama needs and gets is for the nicely-off to pay what they did in the previous Bush 40 3 gave them tax breaks they in no way deserved interior the 1st place.

2016-10-18 04:56:25 · answer #2 · answered by limson 4 · 0 0

The plan is: cut taxes so business can make more, business grows and even though taxes were reduced, more income tax is gained due to the growth in business. When this works ideally, it is beautiful because business has more money to spend and keeps growing exponentially more than it would if it had been taxed higher. The net result is more business growing faster paying lower taxes, but more in total due to increased growth. And that is the plan to finance the budget. I can't claim this will all work ideally, however nothing is indicating that the plan is failing.

You can implement this plan with Ron Paul's to be more fiscally conservative. If you were to do that, you'd increase the potential gains you could make.

2007-11-27 05:31:27 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0 3

They wont balance the budget. The Republican " Front Runners" Will not cut taxes or spending . The only Republican doing more than paying lipservice to these ideas is Ron Paul.

Chinese banks are financing are War and we have not even started to pay them back yet. Who ever gets elected chances are we are facing tax increases. Just dont look for any of them to say so during campaign season.

2007-11-27 22:39:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

When you actually encourage growth rather than punish growth.... more comes into the till. This is a hard thing for democrats to understand. I would rather sell thousands of widgets at a 10% profit than 100 of them at a 50% profit. The IRS has recorded record high intakes thanks to the tax CUTS. I do agree about shrinking government. We could do away with most of the liberal socialistic programs. Just look at history... every time a Dem in office raises taxes the economy fails. Ask Jimmy Carter. Good times huh?

Edit: M M.... as another note to Camperdan's reply (thank you Camperdan.... well said) The other thing your boy Clinton did was Destroy our Military and our Intelligence Communities. His so called balanced budget and booming economy was all smoke and mirrors and we paid the price for it in 2001. Don't be so naive to believe that the massively booming economy just suddenly falls apart due to an election. Reagan had to bail us out of Carter and Bush had to bail us out of Clinton.

2007-11-26 12:22:35 · answer #5 · answered by That Guy 5 · 7 2

Milton Freidman wrote the book, Reagan followed it, so has GW, cut taxes, you increase tax revenue. The treasury has reported an increase in tax receipts since the tax cuts took effect. It's the spending that has hurt us. But when you take a sucker punch that kills 3k of your citzens you need to start beefing up. The political class had allowed security in this country to become anemic. It took a lot of money to bring it up to standard.

To chatter: we've increased spending 30x in the last 45 years. It's good money after bad. We need to abolish the Department of Education. The federal goverment has no business telling states and cities how to spend or what to spend or to teach. Look what happened in Kansas City. The state judiciary ordered this 2 billion dollars (yes billion) of tax money into the system. Ten year later the KC school system is still broken and dysfunctional. You not of what you speak chatter.


M M wrong, wrong wrong. The mid 90's boom was a confluence of two things. Newt Gingerich and dot com. Gingerich's "Contract with America" one of the ten line items was to balance the budget. When spending was cut, it freed up money to be borrowed for these fledgling companies to start up. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. Tax increases stymie the economy. Look at Europe. After years of high taxes to support their socialist countries, Sweden, France, even Russia have decreased taxes to increase revenue and stimulate business. You don't pay for a tax cut. It pays for itself!

2007-11-26 12:26:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5 1

Just a question for the guy who said every time a Democrat raises taxes the economy fails. The last time a Democrat raised taxes was in 1993. That was followed eight years of the largest economic expansion in the history of the world. Care to explain that one?

To answer your question, they won't be able to balance the budget. Nobody would accept the level of spending cuts that Republicans would need to use to balance the budget and since the Iraq War is off book (not factored into the budget deficit) it would be impossible to balance the budget anyway while the Iraq War continues without a huge tax increase.

2007-11-26 12:32:08 · answer #7 · answered by M M 3 · 1 6

Cutting taxes (or at least not raising them) increases productivity, investments, payrolls, etc... all of which translates into increased revenues for all. Including the government. Works every time.

2007-11-26 12:33:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

For those who say cutting taxes works; it is only seems to be working because we have borrowed money. We owe Japan and China billions of dollars. If you have to borrow money to pay your bills every month, you can't say you are doing great. You have to pay it all back some day.
The reason everyone is spending more is because everything costs more.
Republicans don't intend to balance the budget. The only plan they seem to have is to ask the poor and middle class to do without.

2007-11-26 13:05:26 · answer #9 · answered by Just my opinion 5 · 1 5

You can throw every answer out the window right now. They will not balance the budget. President Bush just signed a Declaration (treaty) with Iraq today that will keep our troops in Iraq permanently and we will be spending billions more to do so. And guess what he says it will promote? Yep, American business ("big business") in Iraq. He's trying to tie the hands of the next President in order to help his "big business" buddies. Halliburton ring a bell?

2007-11-26 13:46:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 6

How about cutting the pork to begin with.

2007-11-26 12:31:40 · answer #11 · answered by Cinner 7 · 5 0

fedest.com, questions and answers