Posted on 03/05/2013 7:35:23 AM PST by SeekAndFind
"more objective and complete"
*posts link to Heritage Foundation*
lols ensue all around
Think what might have happened had the growth in government services never happened, and instead that money spent on entitlements had been returned to the people, who could have used it to create new jobs and opportunities?
Hahahaha, right. Just like they are creating millions of jobs and opportunities right now after seeing their share of income reach historic highs. That particular supply-side claim has been proven false many times over.
You linked approvingly to this analysis by the Heritage Foundation: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2012
According to their numbers, the deficit has fallen in each of the last few years. They show (surplus or deficit in billions of inflation-adjusted dollars):
2009: -1,484
2010: -1,344
2011: -1,322
2012: -1,128
There must be some accounting subtlety here that I’m not catching. How can the deficit, even in constant dollars, be shrinking?
Answers to those questions are not important. I have questions of my own:
1. When the government can tell you what kind of health insurance you MUST buy, it’s too big - true or false?
2. When the government can tell you what kind of light bulbs you can and can’t buy, it’s too big - true or false?
3. When there is no budget, in total contradiction to the law, and no one is held accountable for that, the government is too arrogant - true of false?
4. When the President and Attorney General choose to enforce only the laws they choose, and they are still in office, the government is out of control - true or false?
I could go on, and on, and so could every regular to this site...
Just a wild guess, but if revenues go up more than spending, the deficit would get smaller. And, unless I miss my guess, some spending that is getting bigger is not counted... “off budget”
He didn’t say a thing about the cost of excessive regulation either.
what a bunch of commies - you can’t believe a word they say
Yeah. It gets complicated pretty quickly, so I’m not sure, either. Like I said, it’s a guess on my part.
One thing, though, Reagan proved that when you cut taxes, revenues go up, which would partially answer your question. More people paying at a lower rate means more revenue. Again, that’s a simplification that may not be justified here.
Maybe you could write to Heritage... If you do, let me know what they say!
God Bless.
Ask the bond holders of General Motors how safe bonds are. If you do not have the money, be it government or private enterprise to pay off your debts, your bonds are binding IOU's but totally worthless.
Obama changed the rules on the bond holders at GM are basically stole their money. He can do the same to the bond holders of US Government debt.
Next Question.
GM bonds are not equivalent to US treasuries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.