CDZ Why is it so bad to want a balanced budget?

[DarkFury]

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.

How is cutting the top rate from 35% to 15% going to make the rich pay more income tax?

What deductions are you talking about?

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.
1, Home loan interest....to encourage home ownership.
2, Double the marriage deduction to ENCOURAGE marriage.
3, Double the child deduction to ENCOURAGE families.

 

[2aguy]

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.

How is cutting the top rate from 35% to 15% going to make the rich pay more income tax?

What deductions are you talking about?

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.
1, Home loan interest....to encourage home ownership.
2, Double the marriage deduction to ENCOURAGE marriage.
3, Double the child deduction to ENCOURAGE families.

But....if you encourage marriage, and families.....don't you realize that single, unwed mothers are the ones who create all the new democrat voters.......?

 

[Mac1958]

My first post and very happy to be hear. Why is it that here in the US so many people argue against being financially conservative? In my home I have to balance the budget. In our small family business we have to balance the books every month. There are a lot of things we would love to have but we save and grow when we need something. Only loan I have ever had that would be considered long turn was our house mortgage that was paid off in 10 years.

The partisan ideologues from both parties will point the finger at each other over this.

A Balanced Budget Amendment would force both silly parties to fully justify their fiscal & tax agendas, and neither party appears to have the balls to take that on.

Therefore, you won't often find them pushing a BBA with any passion. They're cowards.
.

No it won't.....it will mandate that they raise taxes to pay for their increased spending...do you really want that?

If they want to increase spending, they'd have to justify the higher taxes. If they want to decrease taxes, they'd have to justify the decrease in services.

Otherwise, all we have are paid-off professional politicians in charge of the piggy bank, only with THIS piggy bank, we can just print more money for our kids to deal with.
.

 

[2aguy]

My first post and very happy to be hear. Why is it that here in the US so many people argue against being financially conservative? In my home I have to balance the budget. In our small family business we have to balance the books every month. There are a lot of things we would love to have but we save and grow when we need something. Only loan I have ever had that would be considered long turn was our house mortgage that was paid off in 10 years.

The partisan ideologues from both parties will point the finger at each other over this.

A Balanced Budget Amendment would force both silly parties to fully justify their fiscal & tax agendas, and neither party appears to have the balls to take that on.

Therefore, you won't often find them pushing a BBA with any passion. They're cowards.
.

No it won't.....it will mandate that they raise taxes to pay for their increased spending...do you really want that?

If they want to increase spending, they'd have to justify the higher taxes. If they want to decrease taxes, they'd have to justify the decrease in services.

Otherwise, all we have are paid-off professional politicians in charge of the piggy bank, only with THIS piggy bank, we can just print more money for our kids to deal with.
.

Do you know how they would justify higher taxes...."We have to raise taxes because we are mandated by the new Constitutional amendment to balance the budget....." And they would spend to their hearts content......

 

[Mac1958]

My first post and very happy to be hear. Why is it that here in the US so many people argue against being financially conservative? In my home I have to balance the budget. In our small family business we have to balance the books every month. There are a lot of things we would love to have but we save and grow when we need something. Only loan I have ever had that would be considered long turn was our house mortgage that was paid off in 10 years.

The partisan ideologues from both parties will point the finger at each other over this.

A Balanced Budget Amendment would force both silly parties to fully justify their fiscal & tax agendas, and neither party appears to have the balls to take that on.

Therefore, you won't often find them pushing a BBA with any passion. They're cowards.
.

No it won't.....it will mandate that they raise taxes to pay for their increased spending...do you really want that?

If they want to increase spending, they'd have to justify the higher taxes. If they want to decrease taxes, they'd have to justify the decrease in services.

Otherwise, all we have are paid-off professional politicians in charge of the piggy bank, only with THIS piggy bank, we can just print more money for our kids to deal with.
.

Do you know how they would justify higher taxes...."We have to raise taxes because we are mandated by the new Constitutional amendment to balance the budget....." And they would spend to their hearts content......

But what is the alternative? This?
.

 

[DarkFury]

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.

How is cutting the top rate from 35% to 15% going to make the rich pay more income tax?

What deductions are you talking about?

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.
1, Home loan interest....to encourage home ownership.
2, Double the marriage deduction to ENCOURAGE marriage.
3, Double the child deduction to ENCOURAGE families.

But....if you encourage marriage, and families.....don't you realize that single, unwed mothers are the ones who create all the new democrat voters.......?

Will be tempted by cash reward to get married over welfare to stay single. Yup, thought about it.

 

[2aguy]

My first post and very happy to be hear. Why is it that here in the US so many people argue against being financially conservative? In my home I have to balance the budget. In our small family business we have to balance the books every month. There are a lot of things we would love to have but we save and grow when we need something. Only loan I have ever had that would be considered long turn was our house mortgage that was paid off in 10 years.

The partisan ideologues from both parties will point the finger at each other over this.

A Balanced Budget Amendment would force both silly parties to fully justify their fiscal & tax agendas, and neither party appears to have the balls to take that on.

Therefore, you won't often find them pushing a BBA with any passion. They're cowards.
.

No it won't.....it will mandate that they raise taxes to pay for their increased spending...do you really want that?

If they want to increase spending, they'd have to justify the higher taxes. If they want to decrease taxes, they'd have to justify the decrease in services.

Otherwise, all we have are paid-off professional politicians in charge of the piggy bank, only with THIS piggy bank, we can just print more money for our kids to deal with.
.

Do you know how they would justify higher taxes...."We have to raise taxes because we are mandated by the new Constitutional amendment to balance the budget....." And they would spend to their hearts content......

But what is the alternative? This?
.

The best way to do it....cut taxes and the money they get.....they will never stop their spending, so we need to cut them off.....

A citizen led tax free year....where no one paid any taxes for anything might make the point.....

 

[Freemason9]

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.

How is cutting the top rate from 35% to 15% going to make the rich pay more income tax?

What deductions are you talking about?

When you lower the rate you get more businesses and increased activity generating more money...it happened when Kennedy, Reagan and Coolidge lowered the tax rates.....or was it one of the other Presidents?

Your attribution of the economic growth in those eras is incorrect. The increased business activity was primarily due to cyclical economic recoveries following business recessions.

 

[Freemason9]

My first post and very happy to be hear. Why is it that here in the US so many people argue against being financially conservative? In my home I have to balance the budget. In our small family business we have to balance the books every month. There are a lot of things we would love to have but we save and grow when we need something. Only loan I have ever had that would be considered long turn was our house mortgage that was paid off in 10 years.

The partisan ideologues from both parties will point the finger at each other over this.

A Balanced Budget Amendment would force both silly parties to fully justify their fiscal & tax agendas, and neither party appears to have the balls to take that on.

Therefore, you won't often find them pushing a BBA with any passion. They're cowards.
.

A balanced budget amendment that relies upon spending cuts would assure a permanent depression.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

 

[Freemason9]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

If entitlements and transfer payments are cut, M14S, what are YOU going to live on?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

If entitlements and transfer payments are cut, M14S, what are YOU going to live on?

Rather than an effective response, you offer a personal attack?
Says all that needs to be said.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

"Entitlements" are not charity. They are paid for. IOW, earned.

 

[Freemason9]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

"Entitlements" are not charity. They are paid for. IOW, earned.

Actually, you're wrong. Entitlement ARE welfare. Transfer payments are earned.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.

How is cutting the top rate from 35% to 15% going to make the rich pay more income tax?

What deductions are you talking about?

The rich would pay more under a flat tax. Leave a total of three deductions for people.
1, Home loan interest....to encourage home ownership.
2, Double the marriage deduction to ENCOURAGE marriage.
3, Double the child deduction to ENCOURAGE families.

But....if you encourage marriage, and families.....don't you realize that single, unwed mothers are the ones who create all the new democrat voters.......?

While they raise the children, feed, clothe and educate them, the fathers are voting Republican.

Obviously, any woman who is left to raise kids alone should be punished.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Spending only what we take in requires that entitlement spending be budgeted, rather than mandated.
This means those that receive entitlements might receive less than the Democrats promised them,.
This means fewer votes for Democrats,
Can't have THAT, so....

"Entitlements" are not charity. They are paid for. IOW, earned.

Actually, you're wrong. Entitlement ARE welfare. Transfer payments are earned.

Look up the word.

The right calls Soc Sec and Medicare "entitlements".

Medicaid IS charity. Soc Sec and Medicare are not.

 

[4whirledpeas]

The problem with your household analogy is that it is not the "right" thing to do in all circumstances.

For example, in our household, if we had followed your plan we would be in a much worse situation. When the recession hit, we tried to keep on our employees as long as we could, but eventually ended up having to close our business altogether (and become a 2 person freelance company). Even though we were global, competition was fierce for the few clients still operating, which drove prices down to the point that we bid 1/5th of our pre-financial collapse prices for our product. (100,000 to 20,000 for the same work). It was not enough to pay the bills.

Now, we could have quit our profession and gotten jobs at Home Depot or Walmart (and we did do things like mow lawns and do whatever it took to keep our heads above water) which might have landed us salaries in the $40-60k range. But we did something else instead -- we took out loans to go back to school (so our skills would be state of the art in the work we loved) and to upgrade our equipment -- believing that the economy would eventually recover and wanting to position ourselves with the most competitive advantages possible.

The Home Depot option would have allowed only so much room for growth for our long-term household income (although our budget would have stayed balanced). But because of loans (debt) that allowed us to improve our "infrastructure" we are now making so much money that not only will all debt be paid off by the end of one year, the long-term outlook puts us ahead by almost 5 times as much income.

Developing countries are able to use the latest technologies to build more cost-effective buildings and systems because they are starting from scratch with what is currently available. By contrast, many of our systems (highways, bridges, buildings, energy, schools, etc) were built by our wonderful forward-thinking previous generations during the 1940s onward ...are now outdated, crumbling or inefficient. Those who wanted to take on debt wanted to spend what it would take to make the improvements needed to keep America on the leading edge, so that we could keep competing at the highest levels (and continue to attract the best and brightest to work and live in this country).

My father, a businessman, said that one of the first rules of success is that "you have to spend money to make money" (you can't let yourself fall behind in service or quality and must continually upgrade and make improvements -- or you will lose customers and the competition will pass you by). Those who insist on a balanced budget as our only priority seem to miss the bigger picture entirely.