Quote:
Originally Posted by Drolefille
It wasn't meant to. The concept of "balancing the budget" is taking in more than you spend (none of this addresses the national debt of course). It's just the opposite of losing weight which is taking in less than you burn off.
Theoretically both are simple, in reality they're not that easy.
|
This doesn't make any sense - if you balance the budget, you are indeed "addressing the national debt" because the surplus can go toward recouping debt. I don't see how these can be severed.
Obviously there are dozens of factors at work, such as trade/inflationary benefits to staying a debtor, the dangers of China pegging its currency to the dollar, whatever - but that doesn't change the fundamental nature of math. Having a surplus -> lowering debt.
I have no idea why you're being so dismissive here - budget concerns seem perfectly valid, given the litany of new programs on both the Obama and Clinton platforms and the state of the economy.
Threaded Mode
