poll for REPUBLICANS on deficit

[CollectiveInterest]

Under George W. Bush's leadership the federal government's most recent deficit was $422 billion (over $1,300 per person charged to the national credit card IN ONE YEAR).

How important is this issue to Republicans?

If this issue is important to you please comment on what programs you hold dear you are willing to cut or which taxes you are willing to increase.

[??????????]

Meaningless. This nation has only been debt free once in our whole history.

[Bono]

one of the top 2 issues.
A debt fee, balancaed budget government is the best for all.
I think republicans should get over their fear of criticizing Bush. It's because most republicans are sheeple that the party was taken over by the neo-cons.

[muon2]

Other, because it depends when. During the late 1990's the budget surplusses should have been used to reduce some of the debt load, and not all go into spending or tax reduction. It is not economically useful to reduce debt to 0. Neither large corporations, nor countries should or do carry zero debt. To carry no debt fails to make maximum use of the capital within the company or country and restricts economic growth. To carry too much debt is the problem.

After 2000, debt reduction needed to take a back seat to economic stimulus. The tech collapse followed by 9/11 indicated that capital would be better used to stimulate economic activity and spend to meet new threats. The balance between these two needs can be debated, but they both became more important than immediate debt reduction.

[Bono]

To carry no debt fails to make maximum use of the capital within the company or country and restricts economic growth.

You are implying that economic growth exists because of government. It actually exists in spite of government. The government does not make the economy grow because it has no money of its own, it has only the money it sto.., uh taxed, ie, wealth that has allready been generated by someone else.

[muon2]

To carry no debt fails to make maximum use of the capital within the company or country and restricts economic growth.

You are implying that economic growth exists because of government. It actually exists in spite of government. The government does not make the economy grow because it has no money of its own, it has only the money it sto.., uh taxed, ie, wealth that has allready been generated by someone else.

The government certainly has money that is not from taxes. It's called debt, and the Federal government prints it. Money is created out of nothing and it can be very stimulating to an economy. In fact if a country prints too much, inflation takes off, which then devalues the currency. If a country doesn't print enough, growth is strangled and deflation can occur.

Companies also create their own debt. Bonds and other notes represent that debt, and they can be traded in a way like currency. Large companies create debt for themselves so they can better leverage their existing capital.

[Bono]

To carry no debt fails to make maximum use of the capital within the company or country and restricts economic growth.

You are implying that economic growth exists because of government. It actually exists in spite of government. The government does not make the economy grow because it has no money of its own, it has only the money it sto.., uh taxed, ie, wealth that has allready been generated by someone else.

The government certainly has money that is not from taxes. It's called debt, and the Federal government prints it. Money is created out of nothing and it can be very stimulating to an economy. In fact if a country prints too much, inflation takes off, which then devalues the currency. If a country doesn't print enough, growth is strangled and deflation can occur.

Companies also create their own debt. Bonds and other notes represent that debt, and they can be traded in a way like currency. Large companies create debt for themselves so they can better leverage their existing capital.

I never said anything about corporations.
but yes, government does create money out of thin air. You are trying to tell me that is a good thing? Sure, we got all goodies from it, like the Great Depression.
Frankly, I wonder how much more recessions is it going to take for the government to realize fiat-currency is a scam. A come back to the golden standart wold be in order. Yes, it would slow growth, but it would also make it smoother.

[willhsmit]

Companies typically borrow money to invest -- companies that borrow money for day-to-day expenses are usually in the process of dying. Generally I'd say that for countries, debt and taxes are basically the same thing -- debt today means taxes tomorrow, and the interest on the debt will probably on average cancel out the gain from investing the tax cuts today. Based on this, tax cuts strike me as having neither a positive or a negative value, if the spending is equal either way. Now, spending is a different story, since it almost always seems to be spent in a wasteful way, lining plenty of people's pockets as it goes.