Everything Should Be Cut In Economic Crisis

So we are going to run out of our own made up money? You guys are hilarious!

 

Cut military budget 10%. Use 2% of that saving for more Border Patrol agents.
Deport up to 15 million low IQ fast-breeding illegals. A veritable renaissance for
society and our economy.

 

1) There aren't that many.
2) That's impossible.

 

Yes, and it's sh*t. It devalued our currency by over 300%, it made excuses for the Government programs that precipitated our financial collapse in 2008, it prolonged the Great depression which would have been no different than the depression of 1920 otherwise, and it's schizophrenic about affirming the laws of Supply & Demand.

The central maxim that creates the Laws of Supply & Demand is "All resource are scare, always". Well how exactly does Keynesian theory keep that in mind, while it's asking people to spend like drunken sailors? How has it not been classified as a heterodox paradigm by now?

Whose "we"? The U.S.? We haven't cut spending. And once again, neither has Europe, so who are you talking about? Or are you simply applying the term incorrectly?

Lol, increase GDP growth because of Govenrment spending? Please. China is getting ALOT of GDP growth out of this little project, but can you detect the problem? Or are you so blind by Keynesian prose not to see the obvious?

Fact is, there is measurable quality to GDP growth, and as the collapse in 2008 showed, not all of it is up to snuff.

Nice, went straight for rhetoric, do you have an actual counter-argument, or are you wasting my time?

Oh you wish I was making THIS up. This is your school of economics jumping the shark pal.

 

Not really. If we were in the black, we could use the surplus to form trusts, and then use the interest generated in those trusts to help pay for Government services. Have enough trusts set up, we could even afford to have tax rates lower than optimal as determined by the laffer curve, allowing for more economic growth.

Not so.

Before recent times, it was unheard of for recessions to last longer than a year, much less 4. Even the times where you can specify 5 or 6 years, they were precipitated by some sort of massive Government involvement, like the depression of 1815–21 which was in response to the devaluation of our currency out of inflationary debts accumulated during the war of 1812. And while frequency was certainly up, I would say that this was a good thing. You don't want recessions not to occur, resource allocation just isn't that good, you need market corrections for the very reason that the busts are far worse without them.

In a far more information-oriented and affluent economy such as ours, I'd say recessions would occur even more often under a gold-standard, but would be shorter in duration than observed in the 19th and early 20th century. The ill-effects would also be so understated as to largely go unnoticed.

 

One reason we have a fiscal crisis is that welfare has become so generous that one can have a greater disposable income on welfare than working a median job.

 

Why can't overly-generous welfare benefits be cut?

 

I agree there should be cuts, rational cuts to every program and to spending in general. I do not agree with set percentages for each, simply find the waste and remove it, I would start with cutting off money being sent around the world and in many cases to countries that are not even friends of ours. I would add that more revenue will also be needed and the best solution to that is a Flat or Consumption Tax that is fair for all.

 

I seriously doubt anyone is living it up on welfare, maybe you can produce some facts to prove your statement?

 

Why can't our overly wasteful, mostly unnecessary military budget be cut?

 

That's what happens whenever your society relies on government debt spending to retain its artificially high standard of living for decades - a socialist lie. Europe is like a heroin addict going through withdrawal. You need to balance your budgets or your economies will collapse. That means cutting spending.

 

i dont think paying soldiers for doing their job & giving them the best equipment and training for their job is unnecessary

 

Of course it isn't, but we're not spending over $1 trillion paying our soldiers and giving them the training/equipment they need.

 

I agree. I believe we should end our wasteful and useless, War on Drugs first, before cutting any social spending for real persons in poverty in our republic.

When is the Right going to develop a moral of "goodwill toward men"?

 

I'm not right-wing, but how much we spend on social welfare is mostly irrelevant. You can't just throw money at a problem and expect it to go away, no matter how much our society teaches that you can.

 

I only agree with you to the extent our wealthier politicians are even less capable of bearing true witness to our own laws or their public trust, under the United States.

Why are we prosecuting the general warfare or any common offense, with our specifically enumerated welfare-state?

By no latitude of construction, did our Founding Fathers enumerate providing for the general warfare or the common offense, with our Tax monies.

We should be ensuring full employment (of resources) in the market for labor as a form of providing for the general welfare, and reducing poverty in that market friendly manner on an at-will basis.

 

The highest form of charity, is instilling within a person the ability to be self-sufficient.

We are concerned not with simply alleviating the symptoms of poverty, as you propose, but curing it.

 

Not when the primary employer will be the Government or funded through Government monies!

No public sector solutions to our economic troubles. We should encourage the Private sector or go bust.

 

How do you propose to solve for any "natural" rate of unemployment that is the cause of most simple poverty in our republic? If you are not solving for that, then you have no real solution since even if everyone had a Ph.D. in our republic, there would still be poverty under our current regime, simply due to a natural rate of unemployment usually found under Capitalism.

We could end the expense of our generation long War on Poverty by sacrificing the means of a warfare-state to the end of the specifically enumerated welfare-state our Founding Fathers ordained and established for us; merely by perfecting our capital based morals with sufficient socialism to engender a more sincere, "moral of goodwill toward men", on the part of the secular Right.

What objection can there be to securing the blessings of that form of economic, individual liberty?

We could end generational forms of poverty as we currently know it, because it would only be able to occur on an at-will basis.

 

That's a pretty (*)(*)(*)(*) poor analogy because in real life the doctor does both. Treat the symptoms and cure the disease. You need to both keep people from starving in the streets AND find ways to prevent them from being on the streets in the first place...like making education easier to access or giving everyone universal healthcare.

 

There is no "austerity" in the EU. That is a total fabrication.

 

Yes. In fact, they are not even doing "it". They have only "cut" spending relative to 2009, which was an anonymously high spending year. The only "austere" economic measures I've seen in a western nation came during WWII when rationing was imposed.

 

Your source shows military spending at just about $700 billion, as I said.

You only get higher than that when you add in dubious non-military spending things like FBI, interest on the debt, and homeland security.

 

Growth helps as it expands the base for tax revenues. Why can't the Govt raise revenues to address the fiscal problem?

 

I'm still wondering how you solve an recession problem by putting more people out of work.