September 15, 2010
U.S. Senate candidate Rand Paul cited several ideas for cutting federal spending at a news conference Tuesday, but he said it would be impossible for him to spell out a specific proposal to balance the federal budget before Nov. 2.
Paul, a Republican, has made the federal debt a centerpiece of his campaign, criticizing his party and Democrats for the sea of red ink.
In an interview on WHAS radio last month, Paul said that if elected, he would introduce a plan to balance the budget in one year, as well as multi-year plans.
â€œBut I will stay on the floor until Iâ€™ve introduced five different proposalsâ€ to balance the budget in one to five years, Paul said. â€œIf youâ€™re not willing to balance it in five years, youâ€™re not a serious person.
Asked on Tuesday if he would release specifics on the various proposals before the election, Paul said a candidate couldnâ€™t write a federal budget, which covers thousands of pages and trillions in spending.
â€œItâ€™s impossible for a candidate to write a budget,â€ he said.
Read More: Lexington Herald Leader
Tea Party & Republican's
Tax cuts do have to be paid for if those tax cuts create a deficit.
IE: GWB's borrowed Iraqi War.
Tax Cuts do have to be paid for when those tax cuts promote the permanent loss of jobs (Data show that lowering the Short run Capital gains tax decreases jobs by making Mergers more profitable producing more permanent jobs looses=jobs gone from our economy forever), which reduce tax rolls & demand, which further reduce tax rolls and create deficits (if nothing changes) or creates a need to increase the taxes of those folks who are unaffected or a need to reduced services.
Think of this as you getting sick and what does the doctor do is to take leaches to you and the doctor bleeds you. You respond by getting weaker and the doctors then say well this means we need to bleed you even more.
That is Republican plan!!! Win=Loose Economic Ploicies
Tax Cuts for pushing investment forward (We want demand to increase Today instead of Tomorrow) = improved more efficient processes = better product & services at lower costs =greater demand for our goods = greater demand for jobs.
1.5 labor demand multiplier here
Tax Cuts for R&D produce investment, which produces demand for engineers and Micro-biologists = $60K+ = good paying jobs = new products & more efficient products.
New product lines create demand for jobs more then expanding old product lines.
Think of a factory: If I have increased demand for an existing product I just need to add a second or third shift. If I have demand for a new product I have to create a new line = Construction Jobs. I have to buy new equipment = Increased Durable Goods Demand =New jobs there. I have to then man that line and being a new product initial demand could be much greater then an old product.
3.+ labor demand multiplier there.
Wealthy = Capitalists = Capital Manipulators = Bad and Providers = good, but they are not job creators. Inventors and Innovators are really job creators = new and better products. It is Human Capitalist models, Not supply side Capital models that are correct.
We use to give tax breaks for result oriented activities, which produced a far more stable economy for like 30 years. Higher GDP growth and a continuously higher standard of living for 98% of the population. Win=Win Economic Policies
Obama gives tax cuts to produce jobs.
Republican's give tax cuts to reduce jobs.
Considering Middle Class pays on average 21% in taxes
Wall Street pays on average 15% currently in taxes and are exempt from SSI and Medicare
Who is paying their fair share? Bringing short term capital gains taxes to what that socialist Ronald Reagan had them is not a radical leftist item at all, but a necessary first step towards keeping the bleeding of jobs down and balancing our budgets. Federal and State!