zipity
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 0:32:17 GMT -5
Posts: 1,101
|
Post by zipity on Jul 31, 2011 21:46:59 GMT -5
This is what is being pushed by the Tea Party Members in the House and the liberals will not go along with anything that they want.
I have two problems with the balance budget amendment as drafted by the Tea Party, taxes and borrowing. As proposed, the budget would be balanced mainly by cuts. Under the plan tax increases would require 2/3 majority to pass. This means that if the budget exceeds the current tax revenue congress would be more likely to borrow money to match spending. IMO, what the country needs is an amendment limiting borrowing to no more than 5% of the Federal budget and tax rates that are established based on the spending level. This would force politicians to raise taxes to pay for their budget. Making them stand in front of the American people and explain why they were increasing taxes would do more to cut spending than holding the country hostage over the debt ceiling.
|
|
handyman2
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 23:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,087
|
Post by handyman2 on Jul 31, 2011 22:05:37 GMT -5
Zipity why not also pass a law that says there can be no spending increases in the general budget that exceeds the annual cost of living increase. military excepted.
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Jul 31, 2011 23:16:06 GMT -5
It would be a good start to just get rid of the current process of baseline budgeting.
|
|
zipity
Well-Known Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 0:32:17 GMT -5
Posts: 1,101
|
Post by zipity on Aug 1, 2011 12:32:26 GMT -5
Zipity why not also pass a law that says there can be no spending increases in the general budget that exceeds the annual cost of living increase. military excepted.
IMO, I suppose you could, IMO however you want to give congress the flexibility to fund whatever is in the best interests of the nation with the understanding that they will have to stand behind the tax request to fund those initiatives. The military is a good example, based on world events it may be very desirable to raise taxes to support greater funding, on the other hand you may want to cut some unnecessary military programs saving tax dollars for other programs. Take that example out to all the other government agencies, hopefully representatives won't want to risk their careers raising taxes for something that's not critical. IMO, tying spending to tax rates is the way to go.
|
|
