Question for Cons - tax cuts as litmus test

[Ma'ake]

Watching McCain getting raked over the coals for his opposition to the Bush tax cuts is a fascination. I understand the reflexive push for tax cuts... and then more tax cuts on top of that. That is one thing about conservatives that is predictable.

But what about the other side of the equation - spending? It seems to me if you're pushing tax cuts you almost automatically are required to push (hard) for spending cuts... to the point of foregoing earmarks / pork-barrel in your own district.

Is there a single GOP representative or Senator who has pushed spending cuts for projects in their own district? (If not, why not?)

So... now we have the farcical political situation where GOP candidates pound their chests if they've voted for tax cuts and are quick to identify other GOP candidates who have expressed reservation for said cuts as being unworthy of the title of "conservative", and so on.

Of course, without equal attention to spending reduction these tax cuts yielded very large multi-year budget deficits - during *prosperity* - and now with a chill in the air the very real potential for $800B deficits is staring us in the face. (An $800B deficit for a budget of $3.1T amounts to just over 25% of the budget being put - essentially - on credit cards. This is insanity no matter which way you slice it, especially considering how during the economic boom we *still* spent more than we took in.)

So this charade in the synthetic world of primary politics goes on while mountains of cash are shoveled to the Chinese central bank and any others who happened to invest in T-Bills supporting this credit card spending spree.

I'm sorry, but with such an irresponsible pattern of tax cuts & navy_liberty_call-like spending, it seems to me the real conservatives have been those who resisted tax cuts while realizing government spending needed to be at levels greater than those afforded by the tax cuts.

Protracted deficit spending in both boom times & periods of struggle is anything but conservative.

[Archaea]

Most fiscal conservative desire to control government spending but the truth is that the government fisc is so complex, nobody really understands it.

I would control civil servants, refuse to hire after retirement and shrink, in real terms, not in failure to grow terms, the size of almost all departments. We do too little with too much. Pork will always be there. Get accustomed to it.

[BYU71]

There are at least some in the republican party talking about spending cuts. Sadly there have been too few and perhaps a reason the republicans are in big trouble right now.

Tax cuts are an ideological difference between the two parties, spending isn't. Politicians like to spend. If the tax cuts are revoked, I guarantee the spending will spiral higher than at present.

I hope no one brings up the Clinton years. There was something unique in the Clinton years. '94 the republicans took over Congress and were fresh. They did a lot of good things that kept Clinton in check. However, as time went on they became normal politicians and it became about their power and not serving the people.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Watching McCain getting raked over the coals for his opposition to the Bush tax cuts is a fascination. I understand the reflexive push for tax cuts... and then more tax cuts on top of that. That is one thing about conservatives that is predictable.

But what about the other side of the equation - spending? It seems to me if you're pushing tax cuts you almost automatically are required to push (hard) for spending cuts... to the point of foregoing earmarks / pork-barrel in your own district.

Is there a single GOP representative or Senator who has pushed spending cuts for projects in their own district? (If not, why not?)

So... now we have the farcical political situation where GOP candidates pound their chests if they've voted for tax cuts and are quick to identify other GOP candidates who have expressed reservation for said cuts as being unworthy of the title of "conservative", and so on.

Of course, without equal attention to spending reduction these tax cuts yielded very large multi-year budget deficits - during *prosperity* - and now with a chill in the air the very real potential for $800B deficits is staring us in the face. (An $800B deficit for a budget of $3.1T amounts to just over 25% of the budget being put - essentially - on credit cards. This is insanity no matter which way you slice it, especially considering how during the economic boom we *still* spent more than we took in.)

So this charade in the synthetic world of primary politics goes on while mountains of cash are shoveled to the Chinese central bank and any others who happened to invest in T-Bills supporting this credit card spending spree.

I'm sorry, but with such an irresponsible pattern of tax cuts & navy_liberty_call-like spending, it seems to me the real conservatives have been those who resisted tax cuts while realizing government spending needed to be at levels greater than those afforded by the tax cuts.

Protracted deficit spending in both boom times & periods of struggle is anything but conservative.

On credit cards? A little different than that.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Ma'ake

Watching McCain getting raked over the coals for his opposition to the Bush tax cuts is a fascination. I understand the reflexive push for tax cuts... and then more tax cuts on top of that. That is one thing about conservatives that is predictable.

But what about the other side of the equation - spending? It seems to me if you're pushing tax cuts you almost automatically are required to push (hard) for spending cuts... to the point of foregoing earmarks / pork-barrel in your own district.

Is there a single GOP representative or Senator who has pushed spending cuts for projects in their own district? (If not, why not?)

So... now we have the farcical political situation where GOP candidates pound their chests if they've voted for tax cuts and are quick to identify other GOP candidates who have expressed reservation for said cuts as being unworthy of the title of "conservative", and so on.

Of course, without equal attention to spending reduction these tax cuts yielded very large multi-year budget deficits - during *prosperity* - and now with a chill in the air the very real potential for $800B deficits is staring us in the face. (An $800B deficit for a budget of $3.1T amounts to just over 25% of the budget being put - essentially - on credit cards. This is insanity no matter which way you slice it, especially considering how during the economic boom we *still* spent more than we took in.)

So this charade in the synthetic world of primary politics goes on while mountains of cash are shoveled to the Chinese central bank and any others who happened to invest in T-Bills supporting this credit card spending spree.

I'm sorry, but with such an irresponsible pattern of tax cuts & navy_liberty_call-like spending, it seems to me the real conservatives have been those who resisted tax cuts while realizing government spending needed to be at levels greater than those afforded by the tax cuts.

Protracted deficit spending in both boom times & periods of struggle is anything but conservative.

This is a tremendous oversimplification. You make no allowance for the war, which has been an exceptionally expensive outlay, nor do you give any consideration to what the deficit might have been had the 2000 recession, shortened by tax cuts, persisted.

Moreover, I don't like out of control spending, but as has been highlighted in other posts, a great deal of that spending is mandantory, and completely off limits without an overhaul of the entitlement system. Earmarks, which have received so much negative press, are infinitesmally small compared to the beast of Social Security.

Lastly, the deficit is still quite small compared to GDP, and has remained so. That suggests economic strength.