|
joether -> RE: Bipartisan effort... for some. (3/16/2011 10:43:43 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Bull5o
If you read the budget their is so.much crap in there and they are trying to protect their kingdoms. Their is so.much bs we pay for. 500k for seaweed clean up I. Hawaii bridge to know where. Etc
Do you have any clue how much $10 Billion pays towards those good paying jobs in the private sector? How about $100 Billion? A very good chunk (about 65%) of the Defense Budget, is more or less, 'Middle Class Welfare'. If you truely wanted to balance the budget by slashing costs without raising taxes as well, you'll have to starve the Defense Budget by $600 Billion/year. How fast would your concept die at the federal level? Time isn't measure in so fast an increment.
$100 Billion, does not buy just ten times that of a $10 Billion supply of money. Its the scale of economies at work. A $100 Billion buys much more then just a mere ten times. Do you think this money just simply vanishes from sight and the accounting books? The goverment handles a lot of business with businesses small and large, in tens of thousands of avenues. Cutting that money out, WILL directly affect those businesses.
The result is pretty obvious for anyone with a post high school diploma: Lay-Offs. A business gains 'X' amount of gross profit, doing business with the Goverment. Remove that money and the first thing the business must do is cut back on expenses. The removal of labor is not something the business owner(s) truely want. Finding new help that is profiecent as the current employees (at a future date) will be time and funding consuming processes. But to 'save the company' they'll be forced to lay off many good US Citizens to the unemployment market.
DURING A RECESSION! When the unemployment rate is already one one of the worst since the Great Depression! This is your 'brilliance' taken to the logical conclusion.
You want to balance the budget? Raise the taxes. The amount of jobs lost, from those taxes being raised is far inferior, to the number that will be generated by slashing the budget. And one American could find scores of places they would label as 'wasteful spending', to which another American defines it as 'money well spent'. In our form of Goverment, the majority doesn't rule by 'mob rule'; but rather, protecting the individual from the masses. You still have a problem with that; take it up with the Founding Fathers.
The rich, managed to convince non-rich people, that raising their taxes (the rich, not the non-rich) from the 35% it is now, to 39% would have had dire consequences for the economy. That mere 4% the rich would have to pay in taxes, would have generated $700 Billion alone. That would have gone a long way towards axing out the deficit. Slashing the budget and raise the taxes further, would give the nation a surplus, to which we could apply that directly towards the principle of US Debt we currently hold.
|
|
|
|
