Are we headed for a double dip recession?

I don't argue that higher taxes can have negative impacts but lowering taxes when we have gigantic deficits will have worse effects. I think we need to keep taxes as low as possible to still have a functioning government because it is damned hard to do business WITHOUT a functioning government

So part of that I agree with - we need to keep taxes as low as possible in order to give the economy the best chance at growth. As to the "functioning government" part - there's where we part ways. Maybe your business needs a growing government - but for the VAST majority of businesses in America - government could be scaled way back to compensate for less tax revenue without any affects what-so-ever.

this is what I advocate - cutting government spending. You bring up tax rates during the Reagan era - but you fail to mention that the federal budget was only 1 trillion dollars at the time. Government provided everything businesses and the economy needed for 1 trillion dollars - a sum that Reagan was not proud of - he wanted to cut cut back from that level.

Our current federal budget is 3.89 trillion dollars - almost 4 times larger than it was in 1988. It tells me that we could cut government by 50% next year and 50% the year after - and still be bigger than it was in 1988.

You want to know what's killing us? A government that is 400% larger than it was 30 years ago! That's the difference between now and when Reagan was president.

Cut government - keep taxes low, and watch the economy find it's legs again.

That's the truth.

With the multitude of dips in DC, how can we not be heading for a double dip recession?

BearMtnHIB wrote:

I don't argue that higher taxes can have negative impacts but lowering taxes when we have gigantic deficits will have worse effects. I think we need to keep taxes as low as possible to still have a functioning government because it is damned hard to do business WITHOUT a functioning government

So part of that I agree with - we need to keep taxes as low as possible in order to give the economy the best chance at growth. As to the "functioning government" part - there's where we part ways. Maybe your business needs a growing government - but for the VAST majority of businesses in America - government could be scaled way back to compensate for less tax revenue without any affects what-so-ever.

this is what I advocate - cutting government spending. You bring up tax rates during the Reagan era - but you fail to mention that the federal budget was only 1 trillion dollars at the time. Government provided everything businesses and the economy needed for 1 trillion dollars - a sum that Reagan was not proud of - he wanted to cut cut back from that level.

Our current federal budget is 3.89 trillion dollars - almost 4 times larger than it was in 1988. It tells me that we could cut government by 50% next year and 50% the year after - and still be bigger than it was in 1988.

You want to know what's killing us? A government that is 400% larger than it was 30 years ago! That's the difference between now and when Reagan was president.

Cut government - keep taxes low, and watch the economy find it's legs again.

That's the truth.

Just curious if you know what the cumulative inflation rate has been in the past 30 years?

For example...how much has the price of a new car gone up in that time? Hmmmmm......I'm guessing it might be somewhere around 400%!

Also....what was the population 30 years ago? Seems to me we have quite a few more taxpayers today then we did then, (somewhere around 100 MILLION more, that is!) meaning more demand for services and also more workers to spread the burden around.

So you should be outraged that the government budget has grown by 400% in 30 years? Only if you are very weak in math or too dishonest to put those numbers into their true context.

As for the rest of your post....I don't have time to explain to you the many ways that having a functioning government helps keeps businesses stable and prosperous but I will say this, like most simplistic "lower taxes is the answer to everything" proponents, I seriously doubt you even have a clue of in how many ways it does. And yes, even among the much-maligned "entitlement spending". Do you really think that such spending is only done because of "bleeding heart" ideals? Social stability and freedom from civil unrest due to massive poverty is no small benefit to business. If you can't open your doors to do business because the poor are rioting and throwing bricks through your window what do you think that does to the bottom line? We're in the middle of a huge economic downturn. If we weren't allowing people to apply for foodstamps and other "entitlements" what do you think would happen? There are something like 43 million food stamp recipients right now. Do you have any conception what would happen if all of a sudden those people had no way to feed their children? It wouldn't just be a social tragedy, it would be a nightmare for you, and for me, and for anyone who still owned anything in this society. The crime rates would go through the roof if people were that desperate. Yeah, so we pay a portion of our taxes to make sure society doesn't implode when people get too desperate. You can argue all night and all day over whether that "fosters dependence" or not but if you do you are totally missing the point. There is always going to be a certain percentage of society that can't make it on their own, whether it is because of personal problems, low skill or intelligence levels, physical disability, or just plan old hard times. Entitlement spending isn't there just to help them out, it's to keep the problem from crashing the whole society.

I will say this, like most simplistic "lower taxes is the answer to everything" proponents, I seriously doubt you even have a clue of in how many ways it does. And yes, even among the much-maligned "entitlement spending". Do you really think that such spending is only done because of "bleeding heart" ideals? Social stability and freedom from civil unrest due to massive poverty is no small benefit to business. If you can't open your doors to do business because the poor are rioting and throwing bricks through your window what do you think that does to the bottom line?

Here's where liberals like you are wrong- you think that a stable society depends upon government - and people like me know that government only causes most of our problems today.

For the first hundred and fifty years of this country - we grew and experienced prosperity with little to no government. The federal government was less than 1% of GDP. Entitlement programs did not even exist - and neither did income taxes.

In fact - income taxes were so despised that the founding fathers saw fit to outlaw it with a constitutional amendment (Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution). Taxing the labor of Americans was not legal.

This was changed in 1913. Entitlement programs did not exist - until the 1930's. Many economists now believe that the entitlement programs that were started then made the economy worse by reducing economic activity. I agree and think that without involvement - the great depression would have lasted only a few years.

Those programs have never gone away - they exist as ponzy schemes today. They have grown to gargantuan size.

Do we need government? The answer is that we never needed any more government than the original founders of this country envisioned - in fact they repeatedly warned us against government growing to levels we see today.

Government creates these problems and then claims to have the solution to them - it's a great business and very lucrative work if you can get it - lying and stealing the wealth that Americans work so hard to earn.

From the richest to the very poorest - we would all be better off without government intrusion in our lives. That kaos you talked about in your post - that civil unrest.......

It's coming! Soon as the presses that print our money run out of credit.

And we are running out of credit ...... just about NOW.

You want to see a mess?......

This is what government has created in less than 90 years.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Yeah, we existed without much government when we were living in a Little House on the Prairie world with about 1/20th the population density we have today. That world is gone. Destroying government won't bring it back. What it would bring about would be f-ing mayhem and guarantee our speedy descent into joining the ranks of the Third World.

And you still haven't done the math, have you?