![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #41 (permalink) (top) |
| moderat-e/o-r Location: boston Posts: 11,184 | the eu has a balanced budget act - although they aren't integrated enough to the point where eu laws are respected by member countries.. but, a balanced budget act would work here. you're right about the pork spending. although, pork projects only amount to some $23 billion. we're over $500 billion in the hole.. gotta do lots more cost savings than simply cutting the pork. about half of that amount is the cost of nation building in iraq. by 2005, his tax cuts to the top 1% will cost $92.9 billion. http://www.ctj.org/pdf/gwbdata.pdf seems to me that getting our asses out of iraq (and stepping away from unnecessary pre-emption) and repealing the tax cuts for the top 1% will more than half the deficit. there are other things that need to happen though.. cutting wasteful defense spending, eliminating bush's medicare program and instating something that will actually work, social security reform, etc... |
| | |
| | #43 (permalink) (top) | |
| Molten Ash Posts: 61 | Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #44 (permalink) (top) |
| Guest Posts: n/a | he ran in on that platform, a $300 check for non-rich americans so bush can buy 300 billion in tax cuts for the rich. if you eliminate that tax cut and the cost of the war in iraq, and add the jobs he lost us with his economic bungling, we might just have had an even budget. |
|