Once again Trump is throwing out this “fantastical” notion of his. This is what happens when he goes for these “free” interviews completely unprepared. He allows the press to define him as a buffoon rather than spending his billions of dollars defining himself.
Trumpkins like to live in an echo chamber impervious to anything that shows their Dear Leader is a simply “not ready for primetime” interview.
If the polls show Trump losing, the polls are bad except if it shows Cruz’s lead diminishing.
If it’s an unflattering expose of Trump, then it must be summarily dismissed because its from either the National Review or the Weekly Standard or from some other mainstream news media. With of course, one exception. If it’s a piece showing Cruz in a negative light. The same goes for news item from the Tabloid Press.
So far a change, could someone please read the entire article (rather than have a typical knee jerk reaction) and tells us why this expose is inaccurate? Or is that simply too much to ask because after all we must all live in an echo chamber.
Yet you believe a vote for Ted Cruz is not a vote for Paul Ryan
Of course it can be done. It’s just that you apparently have come to see government spending as sacred or inevitable. Trade is just one aspect. Apply real business principles to all over government and the savings will be tremendous. Start with selling off federal lands...how much could that bring? Make countries pay for their own defense. Eliminate unneeded jobs. Reform government pay and benefits to be in line with economic conditions. There is so much waste and fraud. This is exactly why the establishment fears a president Trump. He really will drain the swamp.
A negative thinker sees difficulty in every opportunity. A positive thinker sees opportunity in every difficulty.
I am a Cruz man on the whole but have seen played out, time and time again, the crucifixion of political candidates by self-important slobs like Woodward (Watergate was about a call girl ring the DNC was running) on nebulous golgothae. The complexity of deficits, interest, debts, trade imbalances is understood partially by maybe a few Americans, namely, professional economists who also happen to be treasury secretaries or deputy secretaries. Does Woodward fully understand how a balanced recovery toward fiscal responsibility can happen? No. Does Trump? No. But - does Trump have the balls, the wherewithal, the friends, the clout, and the confidence to give it a shot as Reagan did in California? What do YOU think?
Trump wants to cut the debt over his 8 years. That’s better than an intention merely to have a lower deficit. If he only reduces it 1 trillion in 8 years he’d still be better than every president since Coolidge. Hillary is not going to reduce the debt.
If Trump cuts the billions we spend on garrisoning other countries it will be a step in the right direction. Now we’re told it is foolish to reconsider the current path of borrowing money from China and Japan in order to afford to defend Japan from China, or paying billions to reinforce South Korea, who has twice the population and an economy 40x the size of North Korea’s...
Maybe you should actually pay attention to some American history.
We have eliminated HUGE amounts of debt in . . . eight years.
Harding and Coolidge eliminated 1/3 of the national debt in eight years after World War I and CUT taxes. Jefferson eliminated about half in eight years from 1801-1809, during an economic recession.
I’m not sure about all $19 trillion but I am sure that massive, significant debt reduction could be accomplished in eight years with important redirection of our trade policy and most of all, spending policy.
Harding and Coolidge had surpluses in every one of their eight years. At one point unemployment dropped to 1.6%.
You heard that right. Can you imagine the impact on American growth and debt payment if real unemployment were 1/12 what it is today???
So, no. It’s not crazy, it’s not fantastic, it’s been done before under much worse circumstances. All you need is will.
And it’s unflattering only because it’s so stupid and the author didn’t even bother to check simple history.
So called “Fact Checking” is itself a nonsensical concept in this context. Here’s why:
A fact that can actually be checked is a generally agreed on matter of historical record. For example, if someone makes a statement that they have visited most if the 57 states, this is a claim that can be fact checked, because travel records can be produced and the word most is generally agreed mathematically to mean more than half.
On the other hand, claims like “we can cut taxes without adding debt, because the cuts will spur economic growth and increase the tax base and tax revenue” can not be fact checked.
In order to support or refute the claim, assumptions must be made regarding the amount of economic growth will come as a result of cutting taxes, and therefore the net change in tax revenues.
It is the same for debt reduction claims. The one making the claim can’t prove it as a fact, but neither can it be proven to be nonsensical.
Generally, those of us who push for reducing government taxes and spending, believe that the government is far far too big, and is choking off the economy. Who knows exactly how much growth is being stifled? Who cares? Just stop the taxing and spending - things will be better, debt will be eliminated by doing the opposite of what was done to create it.
Geberally, it is the Leftists that want big government who make the argument that “this is voodoo economics, this is nonsensical, studies show it is impossible to cut spending or taxes”
At least he’s talking about the debt. No other politician dares to even mention it. It’s like this pretend amount of money that Cruz thinks if we ignore it, it will go away. I’ll take trump trying to get it down then Cruz who closes his eyes and asks God to take it away he will. Cruz is dangerous. Trump is trying. I’ll take trump.
Where is the GOP plan to eliminate the debt?
Unlike Trump, they have the power to do it, yet it never gets done.
Even when the GOP held all three branches of GOV,
It never got done.
1. sell off Federal lands to private US citizens.
2. eliminate entire US Federal Departments.
3. Stop illegal immigration at border.
4. Stop sending Earned Income credit payments to MX for bogus dependent children.
5. Open up some Federal Parks systems to oil and precious metals production.
6. Force Congress to telecommute most of the year. Make a wasteland of the leach system in DC.
Yes, it is believable it could be done.
LOL!
Guess Trump has your number, and the number of a bunch of other 'inside the box' thinkers.
Must be dark in there.
It sounds impossible, but it’s really not. Simply peg the Federal budget increase to no more than “population growth + inflation”. That’s about 2.2-2.5%. Historically, the GDP increases faster than that.
Given Hauser’s Law, taxes will quickly (in about 4-5 years) eliminate the deficit, meaning the debt will start being reduced.
Could it happen in 8 years? No. But in 8 years we could start putting a dent in the national debt, the first time since Eisenhower. And we’d be on a path towards eliminating the debt over the following couple of decades.