Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (40762)	1/28/2010 4:27:37 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

If you have stable small or zero deficits year after year than no one cares enough to push such an amendment. If you have huge deficits than the budget changes would be too large and you can't get enough people to go for it. The ideal scenario (in terms of likelihood of getting the amendment passed and ratified, not in other ways) for such an amendment is if you get a massive deficit disaster and fiscal crisis, then after that sanity gets restored and the budget draws to or near balance, but people are still very worried that the massive deficits could happen again and think it would cause another horrible crisis if they let that happen. Other than that scenario I don't think passing and ratifying the amendment can happen. Well maybe it could be the first step back to fiscal sanity rather than the clincher at the end, but I don't think we can jump that quick from fiscal crisis to balanced budgets, and if you have the amendment wile you still have large deficits, than you create another type of fiscal crisis, something like what CA has been having.