For example, Bush was surprised at how much extra revenue he collected from his tax cuts. He 'budgeted' extra money for them, but, apparently, "they don't cost money, they SAVE money". Welfare reform saved more money than budgeted, also, and the federal budget went in the black during Clinton's term. That wasn't predicted.
However, increasing spending always winds up costing more than expected. And increasing taxes never brings in the money politicians count on, if indeed it brings in any extra money at all.
Therefore, I believe that Ryan's budget will actually lower spending more than predicted, and bring in more revenue than predicted. If we have a culture of self reliance instead of a culture of dependence, that encourages more people to work instead of take benefits. Consider all the extra tax revenue from a roaring economy, to say nothing of all the extra oil and gas taxes and royalties from drilling on government land.
“I think politicians and economists underestimate the positive effect lowering spending and/or taxes has.”
Yea, I remember when Newt took over the House in 95. No one thought that the budget would get balanced for many years - they only hoped the deficit would come down.
We may not like a lot of what’s Romney’s done on the social side, but he’s untouchable on the economic side. He will get things under control, once he has the power. He’s demonstrated that in the past, many times, and he’ll do the same as president - and he’ll likely go over the heads of Congress if the Dems try to stop him, just as Reagan did.
“I think politicians and economists underestimate the positive effect lowering spending and/or taxes has.
For example, Bush was surprised at how much extra revenue he collected from his tax cuts. He ‘budgeted’ extra money for them, but, apparently, “they don’t cost money, they SAVE money”. Welfare reform saved more money than budgeted, also, and the federal budget went in the black during Clinton’s term. That wasn’t predicted.
However, increasing spending always winds up costing more than expected. And increasing taxes never brings in the money politicians count on, if indeed it brings in any extra money at all.
Therefore, I believe that Ryan’s budget will actually lower spending more than predicted, and bring in more revenue than predicted. If we have a culture of self reliance instead of a culture of dependence, that encourages more people to work instead of take benefits. Consider all the extra tax revenue from a roaring economy, to say nothing of all the extra oil and gas taxes and royalties from drilling on government land.”
This is true. Lowering taxes and regulations naturally causes an increase in revenue. I think the best solution would be a flat tax like Newt’s, or a Fair Tax, perhaps with a transition phase using Cain’s 999 plan. The great problem here is that there is no real decrease in spending. He cuts medicaid just to raise the spending in Medicare. He also retains the “good” parts of ObamaCare, which is requiring insurance companies to insure someone after a life of eating at McDonalds with the triple meat burgers and they suddenly need a triple bypass heart surgery. They also keep the public-private healthcare exchanges with the government meddling, as usual, in the healthcare system. The overall “cut” is so slight that it is inconceivable to me why they are fighting over it at all. The other problem is that even in their own “math,” they are making estimates of future growth based on rates today... which are completely debt driven, not actual growth. They are also underestimating the increase in debt these failed programs are going to produce over the coming years. IOW, it’s just gimmickry, and both parties are fighting over whose gimmicky version is best.