Real fiscal conservatives support both in either order. Here's another thing about real fiscal conservatives - they realize that at the heart of the matter is the fact that the size, scope and expense of the federal government is way too large and must be reduced, not enlarged.
I'm a fiscal conservative and I absolutely support the tax cuts. Tax cuts are not the problem. Spending is the problem and we have ALLOT of spending. Each bill that goes through congress is a spending bill. If Trump wants to win reelection, he surely needs to find a way to stop the bleeding or this will hang over his head.
That’s where you’re wrong. Real fiscal conservatives care about the deficit. Cutting taxes without reducing spending explodes the deficit, as we’re seeing now. So a real conservative like me would work on cutting spending without cutting taxes, to bring the deficit down. Then, when the deficit was under control, you can look at cutting taxes.
The role needs to be reduced to a minimum. California is an example of governments lack of accountability. Taxes are among the highest, but our schools rank among the lowest while roads are crumbling and poverty is out of control. The middle class is almost gone and they will now be forced to buy healthcare for illegal aliens. Trump promised to tackle this problem, but ended up spending like a thief with a stolen credit card. Just like the others.
That's why you and I are Rand Paul supporters. If more Americans elected people like him we wouldn't be having this discussion.
I'm not wrong at all. I support cutting taxes and spending, and most importantly of all, I support cutting the size, scope and expense of our overbloated federal government. For the most part, the spendthrifts who suddenly became "fiscal conservatives" when the tax cuts got passed aren't interested in doing any of that. Out of one side of their mouths they complain about deficits and out of the other they support the establishment of additional federal government programs that cost tens of trillions of dollars in more government spending.
Government spending is at an all time record high while at the same time tax receipts going into the Treasury are shrinking for the third year in a row.This is typical of the way Dirty Donald ran his businesses, resulting in his many bankruptcies.What he did in private business he is now doing to our country.
Government is required, and I have no truck with those who argue otherwise. The is that BOTH parties are Big Government Progressive parties.
Sure. It seems the argument always centers around what 'limited' or 'narrow' means. Sure, but then you look at place like Nebraska who didn't got he way of Kansas, you realize that using the worst example to prove a point isn't the best method of argument. Govts are only as good as the people who are elected to run them.
So lets meet in the middle. I won't use the worst case and you won't ignore its existence. As we speak, government employees are enjoying benefits not available to those they are supposed to serve. I would start with them.
The problem with stances like these is that the size of government and acceptable rate of taxes is never defined. All anyone says is "Smaller" and "Less". Yet they would get upset if government is understaffed for things that they want.
Using the government for what people "want" is an abuse of power. We need to reduce the size of government to fill needs only. I do like the "understaffed" argument. Do you know how many people work for the government? About half of them!
What did the Pentagon request? I've seen those things defined and they can and have been quantified. If there's a problem it's that we can't agree on those definitions primarily because we can't agree on what role the government should be playing in our country and in our lives. However, there is a lot of spending in Washington that I think most of us agree we could do without, and those are the places where we could start swinging the budget axe. I happen to agree with a point you alluded to earlier - if the Pentagon says it needs 2 submarines then 2 submarines is all it should get. There's all kinds of waste, redundancy and excessive pork barrel spending in Washington that can be reduced.
Until Congress can get entitlement reform done, bringing down the cost of the largest drivers of debt...medicare/medicaid and SS including SSI...nothing will change. A booming economy won't change that
If we are talking about the Pentagon, and even possibly the State Department, then we can probably agree on some cuts. There are other areas where we can reduce spending if we make correlated changes, but are unfortunately underspending if we don't. The Federal Prison System is one. We probably don't want to put so many people in prison for relatively weak crimes, but if we have prisoners then we must staff the prisons properly. That requires spending. No complaining about perceived "perks" in the prisons. The real loss is in private prison management and a lack of public prison management. Additionally the cost to build these new prisons is so over the top that the manufacture of them should be taken over by the government. And what is really criminal is how the Trump admin is running our federal system with an acting Director and no Assistant Director. There are several department directors who have been acting for years. Lazy and incompetent.
The last times we had surpluses and paltry deficits it was due to tax rate cuts and spending restraint. What we are seeing now is the result of the HUGE spending increases and expansion of government during the Democrat years 2007- 2015. Had it not been for the Republican sequester and austerity programs it would be FAR worse. Yes we need more fiscal conservatives and the one side to even start to look for those is the Republican side else tell me which candidates on the Democrat side are running on just restraining spending increases and cutting the deficits.
Which points to the fact that a lot of this is common sense stuff. The government should be doing things in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible, regardless of who is doing the job.
The blame for this should go to: Republicans and Democrats in Congress and the President of the United States for approving their failures.
All of that spending was a direct result of the republican caused recession which was the worst on record in 80 years. Abject nonsense. Republicans on average increase debt and deficits more than republicans.
If spending is the problem, then cut spending first, then cut taxes. I wonder why the self-proclaimed GOP fiscal hawks never adhere to this. Oh, I actually know why, but never got a convincing answer from them. They still think the tooth fairy makes tax cuts pay for themselves. P.S.: Actually, I think most of them know that tax cuts don't pay for themselves. Yet, they have to continue with the BS rationalizations. so they can justify voting themselves tax cut money that will have to be paid back by future generations, be it in the form of benefit cuts, raised taxes, inflation, or all of the above.
Cool, I'm ok with that. And sure, i'm all for getting the people onto the same benefit systems as Govt workers. Govt workers and private sector workers should have equal benefits so that their is no incentive one way or the other which can lead to brain drain from one side to the other. There needs to be quality people so that the systems run efficiently, rather then underpaying one side so that there is no reason for qualified individuals to work there when they can make more money from the other side.
