The thing people who claim about the effectiveness of the New Deal miss is that it was a political solution ot a political problem. 7% unemployment is an economic problem. 25% is a political one. It may be that austerity and free market economics will get you better growth 7 or 8 years down the line, but the unemployed won't wait that long. The Bruning government in Germany in 1930-32 followed Paulite economics to the hilt, doing a unilateral 33% salary cut for state employees and attempting to aggressively cut spending. The result was they all voted for Hitler who promised public works, and they loved him for it.
In 1931, Americans were being cut down in the streets of Washington by the US Army. five years later the President won reelection with 61% of the vote. The New Deal was an unprecedented success on its own terms. People just have no sense of proportion as to what those terms were.
We need to cut government salaries by 25% and use the rest to pay off the deficit. Cut the president's pay to $250,000. Congressmens' salaries down to $100,000. Implement a 20% cut in all programs other than defense and security. Cutting taxes will allow money to be used in the private sector to hire workers and spend rather than going towards taxes which results in even more people working and reduces unemployment.
Do you have any idea how marginal Government salaries are related to National Debt? You might save a few million dollars. The National Debt is in the
trillions!So you want a 20% cut in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran's Benefits, etc. while not touching Military Spending, which eats $800 billion or about 1/3 of the US Federal budget? I don't understand your logic.
Could you clarify your last sentence? It seems like you said cutting taxes will give employers extra money to higher workers rather than spending it on taxes that reduce unemployment. That makes no sense.
Poll
