Welcome to PatsFans.com

Tea Party Debt Commission Budget

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by patsfan13, Nov 17, 2011.

  1. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,628
    Likes Received:
    176
    Ratings:
    +473 / 13 / -14

    Savings 10 Trillion over the next 10 years. I think the economic results would be better than their projections (debt as a % of GDP and so on), it eliminates our annual deficit.

    About 25 pages Great outline of what we should do, hopefully the GOP nominee takes this and runs with it.

    Just for the record 21% of the savings come from the defense budget and about half of that is from reducing our troops overseas to 45k from the current levels. it doesn't speak about tax policy but this plan combined with a flat tax would reduce unemployment to 'full employment ' levels, this would also increase wages (supply and demand).

    http://blogs.freedomworks.org/files/TeaPartyBudget.pdf



    BTW the PDF file can be downloaded for free so if you want to post excerpts. feel free
     
  2. KDPPatsfan85

    KDPPatsfan85 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,666
    Likes Received:
    93
    Ratings:
    +196 / 7 / -30

    #24 Jersey

    Right now, the federal government is spending 24% of the GDP. The Tea Party wants to cut it down to 16% which would decrease the size of the federal government. WHAT ARE THEY WAITING FOR!! DO IT!! The smaller the government the more freedom we have and the less we have to depend on the federal government!
     
  3. chicowalker

    chicowalker Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2010
    Messages:
    13,641
    Likes Received:
    175
    Ratings:
    +432 / 8 / -4

    printing to read later

    (from scanning to see if it seemed worthwhile, what immediately struck me is that these folks need to be taught some presentation skills... hoping that's not a sign of things to come... we'll see)
     
  4. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,489
    Likes Received:
    505
    Ratings:
    +1,112 / 16 / -9

    Mr. Koch says you're very welcome. :D
     
  5. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    43,293
    Likes Received:
    331
    Ratings:
    +841 / 27 / -33

    The government needs to be smaller and less regulatory...

    But downsizing/eliminating the EPA is scary, particularly as there have been so many modifications and exceptions to the clean water act.. armageddon is coming.

    We all live downstream.
     
  6. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,489
    Likes Received:
    505
    Ratings:
    +1,112 / 16 / -9

    Yeah because deregulation has been so good for so many industries. Oh and especially a deregulated financial sector. That Glass-Steagall thing was poison, I tell you, pure poison.
     
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    25,628
    Likes Received:
    176
    Ratings:
    +473 / 13 / -14



    CRA was not deregulation neither was TARP.


    How is the current regulatory situation with 15% unemployment (counting those who have exhausted benefits) going?


    I do applaud you r consistency is supporting the expansionist government status quo.
     
  8. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    21,489
    Likes Received:
    505
    Ratings:
    +1,112 / 16 / -9

    CRA is the rightie talking-point that had very little to do w/the 2008 meltdown. As to Bush's TARP program, nobody likes it but it was the right thing to do, by the time we did it. It should never have gotten as bad as it did, and my belief is that corporate banking institutions should co-insure each other at a higher level than they're required to under the subsequent attempts at re-regulating the financial sector. That would prevent future bailouts by making the financial giants bail each other out when the system itself is threatened. Predictably, the righties attacked it as "making bailouts permanent." Lies and propaganda.

    By the way, I must take this opportunity to lament your foray into talking about the economy, 13. You have no experience with it, being an engineer and all.

    PFnV
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>