Mittens betrays Teabaggers, admits spending cuts would throw us into recession

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Cut domestic spending back to 2000 levels. The way you do that is shrink the size of the government by laying off public sector workers.

Then you pass pension reform forcing public sector workers to pay 50 percent into their pensions (instead of 3 percent), and then you pass a bill eliminating collective bargaining for public sector unions.

Problem solved. You'll see a surplus in a year.

In what alternate universe would this not be disastrous for our economy? Domestic spending can't be cut back down to 2000 levels at the moment without gutting the safety net and reducing GDP numbers by a non-negligible number.

What would be the purpose of destroying public sector unions besides to hurt Democrats? We need to continue to have a very high level of compensation for federal public workers in order to attract the most qualified workers possible to fill the slots and the sliver of the deficit you'd reduce would be tiny.

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So raising taxes on people who can't afford to pay more, is going to increase, rather than decrease revenues? The Bush cuts have increased, not decreased revenues.

This post must be a joke. Pity the billionaire who is at his highest levels of wealth in human history and paying his lowest tax burden in half a century!

[TheDeadFlagBlues]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of the recipients of the Bush tax cuts are middle class. Raising their taxes is going to reduce, not increase government revenue.

What drugs are you on/may I please have some?