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: TimF who wrote (45640)	9/6/2010 5:25:39 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: "any balanced budget amendment becomes a "raise taxes" amendment." No, it does not! ALL LAWS can be changed, (even 'entitlement spending', foreign military spending, whatever). In the Reagan era SS laws were changed, so it's disingenuous to claim that it can't be done! What you are REALLY saying is that you do NOT TRUST the policy decisions that you THINK the American public will ask for! (While I wouldn't be so sure about that. And I certainly would not say touching entitlement spending is "impossible". <GGG>)

To: TimF who wrote (45640)	9/7/2010 4:28:38 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

I've been back and forth on the wisdom of the (Balanced Budget Constitutional) 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. IMHO it would likely create a self limiting reality. Of course the first iteration would be to force tax increases. After a few years (possibly couple rounds) of that the shoe would fit better on the other foot. The supports of socialism would argue that it was harmful and had to be removed while all liberty loving Americans would protest for massive spending decreases. Obviously the easiest cuts would be from the military. If we were able to survive the resultant Chinese attacks support for military spending would increase. This would hem in the socialists who would then be so outnumbered that socialist programs would come onto the chopping blocks and get slashed repeatedly. After the pendulum swung far towards free will and prosperity returned the charitable side would reemerge and socialist programs would gain favor.