Somebody wanna tell me why "spending has to be cut"?

[tmyers09]

Hear me out. Why? Obviously we can be in debt and spend currently, why change that?

[NoNothing]

1. While we should not cut spending in a recession

The kind of deficits we are running are not sustainable in the long run. Either we have to cut spending OR we have to raise tax revenue, or both. Ideally, if the economy recovers strongly, tax revenues will dramatically increase without the rates needing to be raised.

[Warpy]

10. Actually, we can and we need to

Reducing the Pentagon budget by 10% per year is doable, won't strain the military, and will force those old boys to make some real choices between what they need and what they want for the first time since the 1930s.

Only by taming the runaway Pentagon budget will we ever get this country started back to health.

[NoNothing]

14. Reducing the Pentagon budget by 10%

Will reduce the deficit by MAYBE 5%. Right now, we could completely eliminate defense spending and we'd still have a trillion-dollar-plus deficit. So, it's a good idea but not a solution by itself.

[NoNothing]

15. Delete

D/P

[grasswire]

2. because there are elections coming up

Nobody wants to be a big spender prior to congressional elections.

Stupid, of course. We spend constantly.

[Puzzler]

3. The Right is always repeating the "cutting spending" mantra...

... no matter how good or bad the economy is doing. Trust me, the economy could be booming, and the GOP would still be wailing about too much spending.

[FreakinDJ]

5. But but....Reagen proved deficits are good for the economy

[tmyers09]

6. Too much spending on poor people or the "unworthy".

Clearly they've no qualms about spending money on nice things for themselves, and if they're in government, on wars.

[tmyers09]

4. You know what I mean theoretically though?

While I'm at it, why the fuck do people object so much to rich people paying more taxes? Do they honestly think that they can reach that level, so they're afraid they'll be taxed at that rate?

[NoNothing]

7. In my experience it is a matter of principle

Believe it or not, the reasoning goes something like, "I wouldn't like it if I had to pay higher taxes. Therefore, I don't think these other people should have to pay higher taxes either."

[tmyers09]

9. And it's fucking silly.

Odds are highly against the average person every reaching a high level like that. And obviously, the people would be paying more, would still have plenty for themselves to buy cars, boats, swim in a giant pool of coins, whatever they do.

[NoNothing]

11. I'm saying they don't necessarily care if they will be in that bracket

It's a form of categorical imperative - ethical reasoning through universal applicability.

[lazarus]

13. also

They've completely bought the bullshit argument that supply-side economics works. My dad is a retired executive, very smart and well educated, and I'm slowly getting him to realize that it doesn't work. It's a hard fight, because the media has been selling this meme for 30 years.

[gateley]

8. I've heard it's just that -- that many people think they'll be in that bracket some

day and won't want to be 'unfairly' taxed because of it. Don't know if that's true or accurate, but I did hear that given as a reason.

[driver8]

17. That is something I have never understood, either.

How do the rich convince voters that the rich paying more in taxes is a bad thing?

It is amazing.

[MisterP]

20. rampant feelings of personal threat, mebbe?

just look at the rhetoric about Muslims or Moscow: "mad dogs" and "pirates" you can't negotiate with because they're not rational, they want to kill us for no reason, they're poised to kill at least 10M Americans, if not ten times as many (note the 50s nuclear fears when the USSR had no ICBMs and, like 30 bombers), and they're coming to the farmhouse to KILL YOU!!!!!!!!!!! it's like if "Scream" wasn't a savvy parody but a worldview.,

[Mike 03]

12. We should NOT cut spending yet, but within a year or so we better.

Please read the Congressional Budget Office's report on their projection for the next ten years. I have posted on this numerous times, as have others.

Just go to the CBO website, print that baby out, put aside an afternoon and check it out, or go to CSPAN's archives and look at the presentations about the deficit going forward.

If we don't cut spending or raise revenues by 2020, we will be paying $700 billion a year in interest on our debt. We will cease to exist.

[NoNothing]

16. Revenues will increase greatly

If the economy comes back strong. That's our best bet to getting the budget under control.

[county worker]

18. Think about this.

Yr 1. Your income is 100K. You want to spend 200K. You borrow 100k to do it.

Yr 2. Your income is 100K You want to spend 200K You borrow 100K. You also owe 10K interest

Yr 3. Your income is 100K You want to spend 200K You borrow 100K. You also owe 20K interest on the first loan and 10K on the next.

You spent 300k You owe 330K

At some point the interest has to be paid and at that point you no longer can spend 100K only 70k. If you don't pay the interest you can't borrow any more. If you keep borrowing you end up paying 1/2 your income for interest and not living expenses.

Basically the more we borrow the more interest we have to pay. The more interest we pay the less money there is for anything else.

[tmyers09]

21. Thanks for the info.

I understand it a lot better now.

Basically, whoever we owe this money to, has been lenient as far as paying back interest goes. But eventually, they're gonna ask for it back, and it's at that point that we're fucked.

Also, I read a story a few months back. I don't remember the source so I don't know how reliable it was. It basically said that everything owned by US citizens and government is less than the amount of money we owe. Therefore, the debt can never be paid back. It might be complete bullshit though.

[county worker]

24. When they borrow they buy treasury bonds. We have to pay them back with interest in the future.

They may be 10yr bonds or 5 yr bonds meaning that that the principal and interest are due in 10 years.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. So the Pentagon can demand more money to "protect" us.

Which our heroic congress will gleefully do.

[demigoddess]

22. to pay for endless war, why else???

[Touchdown]

23. Because Ratheon and GE need their $700B

What... Are you new?;)

[whyverne]

25. Cutting spending puts even more people out of work.

Paradoxically the economy has to be flush in order to cut spending so that the private sector can absorb the workers that will be displaced. That's the way Clinton cut spending.

Which is why the Republicans can never cut spending. They're never flush cause they cut taxes first. They're just stupid.