Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

3 Bumps

Which do you think is more to blame for the federal budget deficit?

How does your opinion match up with this poll?

 
grlygrlz2

Asked by grlygrlz2 at 2:28 PM on Apr. 29, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 39 (106,530 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (24)
  • Oh, and to answer the question, I believe spending too much on programs is the biggest part of the problem. I would be a whole lot more comfortable with a raise in taxes if redundant costly programs were permanently cut first. 

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 3:05 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • .(Bush tax cuts added fuel to the fire.


    Are the Obama tax cuts putting that fire out? 

    QuinnMae

    Answer by QuinnMae at 3:02 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • Are the Obama tax cuts putting that fire out?


    NO, he never should have agreed to continuing them!!
    Rnurse

    Answer by Rnurse at 3:06 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • Too much on programs!
    yesmaam

    Answer by yesmaam at 2:30 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • OP, obviously the government spent the money AND cut the revenue, so they are too blame. The reason for the deficit is the combo of those 2 actions-

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 2:39 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • The LC is a hypothetical theory. In order for this theory to be accurate, it would require that all people respond X way to Y situation. Of course the extremes are highlighted (0 and 100)...haven't heard anyone propose raising tax rates to 100% on anyone.


     Similar to USRs comment above re walking away from your devalued home, even if you can make the payments. Many will walk and some will not.


     Now back to the real world and using some common sense. If you need money, are in debt, would you: A) cut your spending only. B) keep spending but work overtime to offset some of the debt. or C) cut the spending and work overtime to increase your take home? Common sense and logic, first.....KISS

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 2:58 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • Yup...them good ol tax cuts. Unless they get the revenue back (they can even take a Reagan nugget out and CLOSE THE CORPORATE LOOPHOLES) and look at the REAL $$$. The BIG ones, not the toe nail clippings of the budget...


    Unfortunately, with our current election and campaign processes, going after the deep pockets is never going to happen. If you're not willing to pander, you can not get elected.

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 3:01 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • I would be a whole lot more comfortable with a raise in taxes if redundant costly programs were permanently cut first.


     I haven't seen anyone say that the answer is solely in raising taxes. I see many saying do BOTH.


     Like Rnurse, I disagreed with how Obama pandered and retained those tax cuts-


    Have to be willing to walk the walk, something few seem competent in actually doing-

    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 3:17 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  •  


    .(Bush tax cuts added fuel to the fire.




    Are the Obama tax cuts putting that fire out? 


     


    Nope....



    sweet-a-kins

    Answer by sweet-a-kins at 3:18 PM on Apr. 29, 2011

  • Republicans speak out against programs, but then cut taxes without cutting those programs. Democrats raise taxes and then spend more on programs. Neither party can get it right. It's sad. I think almost every President and politician failed basic math.
    hill_star03

    Answer by hill_star03 at 3:25 PM on Apr. 29, 2011