I have been asking the same simple question since yesterday, and not a single answer. I'll bookmark this discussion so I can recall it the next time the conservatives whine about liberals not answering a question.
I did answer, sorry you didn't like my answer. Go back and re-read it.
LOL wrote: ...The answer is its already happening (gov't job losses) and no one is telling the voters anything except the BS they want the voters to hear, they are politicians concentrating on their campaign commercials.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
LOL wrote: I did answer, sorry you didn't like the answer. Go back and re-read it.
I re-read all your posts in this thread, not one answered the question of how the Republicans plan to explain to the voters that reducing the size of government will put thousands out of work and raise unemployment. I don't care how many jobs they think they will create in the private sector......if they even will.....that doesn't negate the fact that shrinking government WILL cause unemployment to rise......It seems to me that this fact is the elephant in the room when it comes to Republicans claiming that Romney will create jobs and lower unemployment(pun intended)
archer wrote: No it isn't socialism, and I didn't say it was the solution. Nice deflection though. The question was how do the Republicans spin putting thousands of government employees out of work and increasing the unemployment numbers? All we hear is how Romney will create jobs, but reducing the size of government will destroy jobs
Looks like Otis answered this one already.
otisptoadwater wrote: Well, let's see... If Gubment is smaller and more efficient then they need less revenue to operate. That would mean that the 99% would be able to keep more of their own money and do crazy things like start new businesses and invest in other companies that are succeeding. Imagine being able to pay off debts and not need to be as dependent on credit.
Or we could go the other way, everyone works for the Gubment and everyone in the 99% gets what the Gubment decides they should have. North Korea and Cuba are examples of how that model works.
A statement that unrealistic is hardly an answer.
.....read my previous post.....trickle down economics has never worked......although the right does love to pretend that it will ......someday......maybe......they hope.
So I ask again....how will the Republicans sell the American people on the idea of reducing the size of government, throwing thousands out of work, and increasing unemployment?
You do not know history. Trickle-down economics worked wonderfully from the Revolution until the latter part of the 20th century and created the most powerful economic country in the history of the world.
Denying that trickle-down economics does not work does not make it truth. It has already been demonstrated and proven that it works better than any system ever known.
Archer, I can only answer what I would say, I dunno what repub politicians would say.
Lets take the post office for example. Volume of mail is continually declining, losses are 10s of Billions a year. Re-structuring and downsizing is necessary, and job losses are certain. Phased in gradual attrition and early retirements would be the best.
Cutting government spending is a lot more than reducing head count, the Fed payroll is only a fraction of the 4 Trillion dollar budget.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
LOL wrote: Archer, I can only answer what I would say, I dunno what repub politicians would say.
Lets take the post office for example. Volume of mail is continually declining, losses are 10s of Billions a year. Re-structuring and downsizing is necessary, and job losses are certain. Phased in gradual attrition and early retirements would be the best.
Cutting government spending is a lot more than reducing head count, the Fed payroll is only a fraction of the 4 Trillion dollar budget.
Isn't that the issue? I hear so much from the Republicans about shrinking the size of government....yet that isn't going to save us much in the whole federal budget....it's a catch phrase that sounds good. Yet the downside of doing that......putting people out of works and raising unemployment, is never mentioned to the American people. I don't disagree that our government should eventually be leaner and more streamlined....but this is NOT the time to be doing it.....which is why I asked the question in the first place. Voters need to know if the Republicans are serious about eliminating departments of the government, if they are going to be adding to the unemployment numbers......I suspect it just a lot of rhetoric, and it will be business as usual in the federal government should the Republicans win.......but that is NOT what they are saying now, and they are NOT telling the American people the truth about the downside to reducing the size of government.
