re: #207 Rightwingconspirator

When revenues increase spending is increased. Reagan, Clinton, they all let that happen. Except perhaps Bush 41 who traded tax increases for a deal to limit (not cut) spending. The fact is overall, that both parties overspend. What is different is not the overspending, just what it gets spent on.

Oh and can we please remember that congress spends, Presidents can only sign off, veto, or bully pulpit.

I’m all for trying to cut spending, but to do that in any meaningful manner, we need to have a serious debate about the major parts of the budget, which are defense and entitlements. Understandably, neither party is super eager to touch either of those, even though it may be possible to save money without cutting things in some cases if there were ways to reduce operating costs for those programs (I don’t know how large a savings could actually be gained there and how easy any changes to get said savings would be to implement). And, yes, it may mean cutting some benefits or changing eligibility.

All that being said, I’m not entirely sure more spending, in the abstract, is a bad thing. So long as that money is being spent wisely (Which, granted, is always a question with anything), it seems fine to me, at least up to a point.