SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Peter Dierks who wrote (45497)9/6/2010 3:37:41 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) of 71588
 
With the federal debt at $13 trillion and growing, we support a constitutional amendment to require annual balanced budgets.

With most of the spending on autopilot from entitlements, and after a huge leap in non-entitlement spending, and with a tax rate increase on auto-pilot because "the tax cuts expire", any balanced budget amendment becomes a "raise taxes" amendment.

I've been back and forth on the wisdom of the amendment but after all the extra spending we've had, I think I can only support it if its combined with some way to make tax increases more difficult, or to otherwise favor reduction of spending (or at least reduction of planned increases) ahead of tax increases. And it should count current taxes and current spending as the baseline, not planned increases which would allow for "huge spending cuts", and "big tax cuts", that leave both taxes and spending higher.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News