WASHINGTON — Reducing government deficits Mitt Romney's way would mean less money for health care for the poor and disabled and big cuts to nuts-and-bolts functions such as food inspection, border security and education.
Romney's also promising budget increases for the Pentagon, even above those sought by some GOP defense hawks. So that means the rest of the government would have to shrink even more. Nonmilitary programs would be cut below even those called for in the tightfisted House GOP budget passed last month
Reducing deficits doesn't even touch the debt problem. It just means charging less while the debt still grows. It appears that there is no answer to the debt problem, at least as long as voters favor a "nanny state".
Reducing deficits doesn't even touch the debt problem. It just means charging less while the debt still grows. It appears that there is no answer to the debt problem, at least as long as voters favor a "nanny state".
Would you favor cutting food inspection, border security and education?
"Nanny-Staters" would push us over the cliff by justifying every expenditure. You do realize 41 cents of every dollar spent is borrowed?
Which would be a problem if the rest of the world didn't create larger debts. That money is spent on things that improve the ability of the US build GDP. If we hadn't borrowed and spent as we have, we would have a fraction of the GDP we have.
We've been over this, Eddie.
__________________
We work together every damn day. --Jon Stewart
Which would be a problem if the rest of the world didn't create larger debts. That money is spent on things that improve the ability of the US build GDP. If we hadn't borrowed and spent as we have, we would have a fraction of the GDP we have.
We've been over this, Eddie.
We have indeed been over it and even Obama doesn't use your arguments.