[randita]

Either these projects are deferred, with concurrent economic impact, or they go forward on the back of additional Gov’t borrowing or imposition of higher charges and fees. Either way the consumer will pay and, if taxes are eliminated, the consumer will very likely pay much more in the form of other indirect cost increases.

I respectively disagree. With that logic, no taxes would be cut.

How about the government examines its spending just as most of us are doing and come up with ways to cut spending? Why do we, the little people, have to pore over grocery expenses and end up eating more dried beans and pasta, yet there's no incentive for government to get by with less.

[TCats]

Your disagreement is posited on the Road and Infrastructure expenditures being unnecessary/wasteful. If that is true, I agree, let’s cut taxes and expenditures. If not true then these projects must go forward and be funded some way, all of which are ultimately by Taxpayers or Users (Who are, for the most part) one in the same.

Unfortunately, I see an INCREASED requirement for this type of expenditure, above what is already being spent. Cutting taxes that funds these requirements will only delay them, at future higher costs in terms of increased degradation and lowered efficiency of use, or require borrowing, again, at future higher costs.