View Single Post
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 01-30-2008, 12:45 PM
raytri's Avatar
raytri raytri is online now
Site Moderator
Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Minnesota
Age: 41
Posts: 17,651
usa us minnesota
raytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond reputeraytri has a reputation beyond repute
Credits: 110,981
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth-Bringer View Post
Give me a break. Even the article notes the 30% figure isn't exact and is roughly adjusted for inflation ( is caused solely from government action - printing too much fiat currency). They then conclude with a statement acknowledging the actual 12% figure.
Failing to adjust for inflation over a 10-year period is a mistake, not a valid alternative.

Quote:
Not if you sell off some non-essential federal assets to pay down on the national debt - thereby reducing the tax revenue needed, currently over one third of the income tax, to pay down on that debt.
Clearly, reducing the debt reduces costs in the long-term.... but it increases costs in the short term. There ain't no free lunch.

Plus I'm sure you have an interesting definition of "non-essential." Considering that Ron Paul's definition of that term includes most of our military, the Dept. of Education and various other entities.
__________________
Man up.
Reply With Quote