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 (46141)	9/24/2010 3:11:18 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

There isn't any reason to doubt it would work if it was fone (as opposed to doubting it would ever happen). Basically the areas I mentioned cover the vast majority of federal spending. True some of the big areas where just "restrain growth", but "restraining growth" goes all the way down to zero. If you stop growth in entitlement spending, all the other cuts wouldn't even be necessary. But itself putting a lid on entitlement spending would strongly move the budget towards balance. Then you have restraint on defense, canceling stimulus and bailout spending, and cuts or eliminations of other areas of federal spending that would add up to a total of hundreds of billions. Such a budget plan will likely never happen. The political opposition might be too strong. But its obvious that it would be enough to move the budget to balance if it was done. Unless your assuming almost no economic growth going forward your doubts are silly.