Proponents of deficit reduction argue that governments who do not control budget deficits and debt are at risk of losing their ability to borrow money at affordable rates. Opponents of deficit reduction argue that government spending would increase demand for goods and services and help avert a dangerous fall into deflation, a downward spiral in wages and prices that can cripple an economy for years.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
Yes, and eliminate federal agencies that are unconstitutional
@9GSCJQ62yrs2Y
Pure democracy in of itself is unequipped to properly and effectively carry out the duties of government
@9FCV3VJ2yrs2Y
Government spending is driving higher inflation, which hurts everyone - especially those on fixed incomes, and adding more debt, which will burden future generations.
@9GKCFN82yrs2Y
The fact that an agency is not mentioned explicitly in the Constitution does not mean it is unconstitutional. This is a spurious argument.
@9HS65M92yrs2Y
Strawman. Federal government functions which can be shown to be unconstitutional, especially as examined under the 9th and 10th Amendments, should be abolished. "Explicit mention" is irrelevant.
@98L5M5C3yrs3Y
The federal debt is out of control (31 trillion), and these non-constitution agencies are a big part.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No
@9FL38Q52yrs2Y
el gasto publico esta bien que que el gobierno lo pague por ellos tienen el impuesto de muchas cosas.
@HelcovichEmireRepublican5mos5MO
Why can't people just use English? It's the #1 language and everyone should be required to learn it
@9GKCFN82yrs2Y
Government should be reduced but that should be done across the board until our government is only large to govern itself.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, reduce military spending instead
@LmGordonLibertarian 2yrs2Y
The United States spends an increasing amount of money on an already over funded military. There are other aspects of the economy to use this money for like public transportation, social security, and healthcare.
@HelcovichEmireRepublican4mos4MO
If it weren't for the military, we'd be invaded by our enemies. The only reason countries are afraid to go to war with us is because of our big military
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, increase taxes on the wealthy instead
@9FQ6Y662yrs2Y
We have two choices when it comes to bringing the revenue and expenditures in the budget closer together: reduce spending and increase revenue. Practically speaking, the discretionary spending portion of the budget is so small that, as long as we're not willing to discuss defense spending in a meaningful way (and we are demonstrably unwilling), there's simply no practical way to close the budgetary gap by reducing spending alone. Further, my view is that many of the kinds of services which would be stripped away in service of that goal are essential functions of government--things… Read more
@HelcovichEmireRepublican4mos4MO
The job of the federal government is to create and enforce strong borders, enforce the law, and maintain trade/diplomacy with foreign countries. It is not to help the general public or promote welfare. That is up to the people and states.
Almost 20% of federal public spending is on welfare programs, so if those funds were cut, much harm would come to citizens all over the US.
@HelcovichEmireRepublican5mos5MO
So cutting welfare spending would significantly reduced government spending which is the goal here
@HelcovichEmireRepublican7mos7MO
I would rather cut funding for welfare programs than raise taxes on the rich. Raising taxes on the rich to support welfare programs is basically taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor, which is communism.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, increase taxes on large multinational corporations instead
@9GSCJQ62yrs2Y
Multination cooperation by their very definition have no allegiance to one nation and therefore are only loyal to their economic model therefore not should we tax them we should ban their existence outright
@HelcovichEmireRepublican7mos7MO
Better than taxing rich people, but raising taxes on large corporations is still too much like communism
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
Yes, but by drastically reducing the benefits and salaries of government officials
@9GFP2DCProgressive2yrs2Y
The government needs to pay it's people a fair wage, equal to that of the same position in the private sector.
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, focus on ending tax evasion instead
@9FPYFDK2yrs2Y
The government already takes a majority of the population's income. They've recently not been spending it wisely.
@B38PD8V6mos6MO
I do not believe that if we end all tax evasion, we will end up with a budget surplus, especially considering our deficit. Instead we should make cuts to public spending, eliminate, reform, and streamline these services to make them more efficient and simpler for the people while taking less of their money.
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
No, cuts to public spending will negatively affect the economy
@ISIDEWITH11yrs11Y
@ISIDEWITH9yrs9Y
No, reduce the number of government officials instead
@92JWXW73yrs3Y
No, reduce the amount of government officials instead. We should also focus on ending tax evasion too. Cuts to public spending will negatively affect the economy.
@8WZSGJR3yrs3Y
“We should also focus on ending tax evasion too”
yes, Companies like Apple and Amazon have gone far enough with tax evasion. if we could get a cut of their net worth we would be in good shape and we wouldn't need to tax the middle class which is shrinking more than ever.
@8WZSGJR3yrs3Y
but One thing I do support cutting in the military is nuclear weapons I'm not saying get rid of all of them just low enough that we can start handling them with proper care the extra money that will be saved by not having to handle as many nuclear weapons will be vital for our economy.
@8FTVLYP5yrs5Y
Essentially yes. But other things need to be done. Increase taxes on top income bracket, eliminate deductions and loopholes on taxes for large corporations, reduce military spending and police budgets.
@8D7X8VBNew Liberty5yrs5Y
Yes, replace many gov programs such as welfare with UNIVERSAL INCOME. too much waste in government spending and programs.
@HelcovichEmireRepublican5mos5MO
A universal income would still require government spending to fund it
Changes are needed but this is a very complicated question
@92C5M7S3yrs3Y
No, reduce the amount of government officials instead. We should also focus on ending tax evasion too. Also cuts to public spending will negatively affect the economy.
@8W6XWGK4yrs4Y
Yes, but only where there is unnecessary spending in public funds.
@B648NBC1mo1MO
No unnecessary cuts to social safety net programs and essential government services and no unnecessary spending
@Brandonnoe84Libertarian 10mos10MO
yes, and increase taxes on large corporations and the wealthy, reduce military spending, end tax evasion, eliminate federal agencies that are unconstitutional, and drastically reducing the benefits and salaries of government officials.
@9FMVJYV2yrs2Y
Yes and No, the government should reduce some spending but not just one section of spending
@8FQX2T9Independent5yrs5Y
Increase taxes on the wealthiest, limit corporate tax loopholes, and reform spending to go where it will most lift Americans - when lifted we will earn more and in turn pay more taxes that can be used to improve infrastructure, support those in need, etc
@B5X32CW2mos2MO
yes and limit the amount of federal government workers. States can determine staffing for their own state governments
@B5QJ4GL3mos3MO
Cut unnecessary spending but no cuts to social safety net programs and essential government services
@9SXBYJP1yr1Y
No, redistribute military spending and increase taxes on large multinational corporations while closing tax loopholes
No, cuts to public spending will hurt the economy. Instead, increase taxes on wealthy individuals and large corporations and make it impossible for them to get out of paying.
No, boost taxes on the wealthy and large corporations and focus on ending tax evasion and eliminating wasteful spending instead
@9SGS2K21yr1Y
Only in areas of waste along with military waste, reduce tax evasion and loopholes and increase taxes on the ultra wealthy.
@9S2PDWW1yr1Y
There should be cuts, made to public spending, from the welfare category and in government spending on Bureaucracy. The issue with the federal welfare policy is it is very bloated and has taken on of number responsibilities. It shouldn’t have. Welfare should be a state responsibility, not a federal. And taxes should be raised in order to pay off the national debt, or reduce it to a certain points that mitigates the risk of A default. Public spending is essential to the American economy, primarily in the areas of infrastructure and in education and healthcare, but the federal government should reduce its welfare benefits, and Adopt a welfare policy that helps people get jobs and trains them for those jobs as opposed to getting people subsidies.
Cut military spending, increase taxes on the wealthy and corporations while also focusing on tax evasion.
@9JK3GFF 2yrs2Y
We should instead lower the income of government officials making over $80,000 and we should tax multinational companies.
@9GGQDTY2yrs2Y
No. We should: decrease military spending, increase taxes on large corporations, AND end all forms of tax evasion
@9HNVCYJ2yrs2Y
No, find alternative methods of saving money, such as reducing military spending, ending tax evasion, and taxing the rich
@9GN5KWP2yrs2Y
No, crack down on tax evasion, cut wasteful spending, and boost taxes on the wealthy and large corporations instead.
@8GJZJKG5yrs5Y
Yes start by eliminating lifetime pay and benefits for congress and senate
@8V2ZT4L4yrs4Y
Cut unnecessary programs and reform current ones (like welfare) to be more cost effective and efficient.
@8D7ZTLD5yrs5Y
No, reduce military spending and foreign aid instead
@8P75L2YIndependent5yrs5Y
this is too general of a question, and relies on too many assumptions in order to answer.
@98FXVY73yrs3Y
No reduce military spending and increase taxes on the wealthy
No, reduce military spending, tax churches/the clergy, increase taxes on multinational corporations and the wealthy.
@8FNM7FW5yrs5Y
Reduce military spending, increase tax on the wealthy, increase taxes on large multinational corporations, end tax evasion, reduce government officials and drastically cut their salaries/benefits. Then you won’t have to cut into bettering cities and roads and stuff.
@8FMDDFS5yrs5Y
No. Reduce military spending, pork barrel politics, and government funded elections.
@8XJKLLP4yrs4Y
No, reduce government officials pay, military spending, tax evasion, and increase taxes on the rich and businesses.
@9XXJQ8P10mos10MO
Yes, but cut down on the salaries of government officials and eliminate federal agencies that are unconstitutional
@9F4786Y2yrs2Y
Reduce spending on certain people, give the poor a bigger advantage, and take away the rich extra money
@9F35KBP2yrs2Y
Yes, and drastically lower government employees salaries and pensions
@Kit-WolfkatProhibition 2yrs2Y
Reduce spending on military by a lot, and cut the benefits and salaries of government officials.
@9DZXNLK2yrs2Y
Yes, but only for things that receive more than their fair share of funding and increase taxes on the wealthy.
@9DRHX76 2yrs2Y
Annual audits of all public spending should be required; particularly regarding private contractors for the wildly bloated Defense Department
@9DRH6Q72yrs2Y
No. Let's use our overly massive defense budget as well as stopping corporations from evading taxes altogether.
@9DPMQ8H 2yrs2Y
No, just stop sending money overseas first like to Israel or Ukraine.
@9D769PB2yrs2Y
Tax the wealthy and rich cooperation and focus on stopping misplaced money and corruption getting the money.
@9D6V4WXRepublican 2yrs2Y
No, but balance the federal budget.
@9BKSV3Y2yrs2Y
No, reduce military spending instead No, increase taxes on the wealthy instead
@95YXM3LRepublican3yrs3Y
No, don't decrease domestic spending, instead eliminate foreign spending.
@986774RIndependent3yrs3Y
No, increase taxes on large multinational corporations and the wealthy, and also focus on ending tax evasion
@97ZHBMF3yrs3Y
No, reduce military spending, increase taxes on the wealthy, focus on tax evasion as well as eliminating tax loopholes, and increase taxes on large multinational corporations instead.
@8YMR3TJ4yrs4Y
No, drastically reduce military spending, increase taxes on the wealthy, and increase taxes on large multinational corporations instead
@8WD7FM44yrs4Y
No, instead reduce military spending, end tax evasion, and increase taxes on the rich and large corporations
@8TL2CKB4yrs4Y
Decrease politicans benefits and military spending, end tax evasion and raise taxes on multinational corporations
No, reduce military spending, ending tax evasion and increase taxes on the wealthy instead.
No, raise taxes instead on shareholders, raise somewhat but keep a stable tax rate on corporations, lower taxes on small businesses, and address deductions and loopholes to generate revenue for the federal government.
@B6RZL5VAmerican Solidarity3 days3D
No unnecessary cuts to social safety net programs and basic government services, and no unnecessary spending
@Gingerscot4 days4D
No but increase taxes for high earners, and work with other countries to tax multinational corporations.
@B6RHTT64 days4D
Let’s focus on ending tax evasion, reduce the number of government officials, and drastically reduce the benefits and salaries of government officials that remain.
@B6RBFQT5 days5D
End subsidies and reduce military spending first, then cut federal agencies and programs that are unconstitutional, and transition all welfare programs to joint federal-state programs.
@B6R6GMV5 days5D
Yes, but cuts must be targeted, not across the board, and not applied to essential services like healthcare, aid, social services, etc. Cuts should target wasteful or bloated programs only and be paired with increased taxes on billionaires and large corporations, as well as a wealth tax and a crackdown on tax evasion.
@B6QW8G85 days5D
No, but all of those things. We dont need 1 solution we need progressive and intentional rules and regulations.
@B6QPP826 days6D
No, increase the age to qualify for social security adjusted to average lifespan to receive benefits. Which would be around 81 years of age.
@B6QN6T4Progressive6 days6D
No, instead, raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and cut military spending, and crack down on tax evasion. This will not harm the working class.
@B6QKYY56 days6D
No, increases taxes on both the wealthy and people who evade taxes intentionally, except for those who aren't eligible to be taxed on.
No, austerity is cruel and has proven time and time again to have an overall negative economic income, only increasing wealth disparity and corporate profits at the expense of most people.
@B6NLCBJ1wk1W
Yes, but only to the most unsent and destroy departments that aren’t very useful or unconstitutional and reduce the wages of government employees and a few other politicians to make it easier
@B6NHV4F2wks2W
No, and rapidly eliminate all military/spy spending, animal ag/fishing subsidies, fossil fuel subsidies, nuclear fission power subsidies, etc.
@B6M2DGB2wks2W
There are many ways the government can be made more efficient, like no government agency should still be using Windows 95. If we stop letting drug companies pull drug prices out of their asses when the NIH paid for most if not all of that drug’s development as well as making doctors figure out billable hours instead of going by the usual and customary rate, government spending on healthcare will get a lot cheaper. Building up good jobs and strong communities will reduce the need for social spending or at least spend it better
@B6L6GB32wks2W
The government should not make cuts to public spending for the fact that most of these public contributions allow for individuals to get employment. Paving new roads, sidewalks, maintaining street light services and such are done by people who are willing to work. It would not reduce our national debt, but there are certainly other ways we can find to reduce our debt.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
