|
Konichiwaneko -
You just described me. Used to be a liberal, now I am conservative. I do, however, know (personally) of one case where the reverse happened.
Flyguy -
read the post before yours
skier -
Cutting the fat leads to lower gov't outlays. Lower outlays = lower growth of the debt.
Incentives for people and companies to prosper leads to increases in (not the only factor, but a factor nonetheless) tax revenue for the government.
An example: Take the gov't grant away from the freak that uses it to study the sex lives of squirrels. The government does a lot of stupid shit with our money (yes, it is our money that we gave to them). I have to live on a budget. Companies have to live on a budget. The government should to. I am getting fed up with entitlement program after entitlement program being created and growing to outstanding proportions.
Anyway, yes a surplus "should" be the result. However, I have already been appeased with tax cuts, so I won't bitch. Also, I am a realist and I know that the debt needs to be paid down. You would hear less screaming from me if I thought that the government was spending (or at least trying to) the money more wisely, surplus or not, lower taxes or not.
This is kind of a 50/50 issue for me with Bush. I liked his tax cuts, but I got tired of his blank check policy. I did feel, however, that Kerry would have been much, much worse (there are other ways to raise my taxes than through an increase in income taxes--look at the election results in Colorado for a prime example)
|