Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: listenhillary
But it would achieve what we want. It would make government smaller. It would keep making government smaller as the economy would grow and the government would not.

It wouldn't even make a dent in the deficit by the end of his term, and you characterize anything more than that as "slash and burn". A couple of decades of that would be undone by a single Democratic administration, and you know it.

793 posted on 11/14/2007 2:27:12 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 792 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic

I’m not even saying that our politicians are CAPABLE of doing this. It is a less painful way to shrink the government. IF THEY WERE CAPABLE OF DOING IT. It is a start.

If our GDP was 22 trillion dollars and the budget was 2.9 trillion and stayed there for 4 years.

Assuming a 4% growth in GDP for this exercise

At the end of 4 years the budget would have gone from 13.1% of GDP to 11.2% of GDP.

From 13.1 to 9.6% of GDP after 8 years.


794 posted on 11/14/2007 2:42:47 PM PST by listenhillary (You get more of what you focus on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 793 | View Replies ]

To: tacticalogic
A couple of decades of that would be undone by a single Democratic administration, and you know it.

Or by nominating Ron Paul who would lose any match up with a democrat in 08.

796 posted on 11/14/2007 3:33:01 PM PST by listenhillary (You get more of what you focus on)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 793 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson