Quote:
Originally Posted by TracyCoxx
The TLB staff can place words in my mouth and change the meaning of what I wrote, then state the obvious that I would say didn't say it. It is obvious so I won't.
So anyway, is the statement above in quotes an empirical statement, or does it depend on one's point of view? If it does depend on a viewpoint, can someone please explain what viewpoint, and within that viewpoint how it's rational to continuously operate in a deficit?
|
Were the United States never to incur debt as a nation except during a "national emergency," nearly everything -- including things Tracy Coxx probably would like to continue to have provided -- would disappear, unless:
a. "national emergency" were defined to include all those things
b. taxes were raised to their highest levels ever
Even the founders expected the United States to run a deficit. Read Alexander Hamilton. Countries operate this way; the argument that seeks to make it equivalent to continuing to use your personal credit care, whether that argument is stated explicitly or ghosted, is a diversion from the real discussion.
So, Tracy Coxx, as you've been asked before: Let's assume the United States ceases all deficit spending. List here what you're willing to see disappear. National defense? Federal highway maintenance? Air traffic control? What? Or will you list the teensy little ideological budget cuts like the Republicans in Congress like to pretend really make a difference in the overall level of spending?