Dash wrote:
Elmarnieh wrote:
They would simply declare a war and never wage it to get by the law.
Nobody is thinking like politicians.
I'm not quite that cynical but this is my take too. Devil would be in the details and loopholes. I have to admit it sounds good but i wonder what the outcome would be. I think it would be to soak the rich even more.
In an ideal world they would eliminate pork, waste, corruption. Privatize large portions of the government. Get rid of non-performing or under performing programs, kill wasteful subsidies and all that. If that happened, well hells yeah.
Problem comes in when you have politicians pandering to a LOT of voters and asking them "Hey who wants free healthcare? Who wants their social security check? Who wants xyz entitlements? We'd LOVE to give it to you but whoops, constitutional ammendment says no. Now, where could we get some more money... *glances at staffer posing as a well dressed businessman with a monocle lighting a cigar off a 100.00 bill*
I'm sure there would inevitably be ways of finding extra money and running a deficit of some sort, but any balanced budget ammendment would, at the least, massively curtail this if for no other reason than that the budget would need to be balanced for a few years and some of the principle paid while they figured a way around it.
My suggestion included a panel that doesn't answer to Congress or the President precisely to curtail this nonsense, however. Elmo, of course, ignored that totally in his rush to claim it wouldn't work because of "politicians", illustrating once again why he's on ignore. He doesn't actually think. That would never work. Even without a panel, what country would tolerate a declaration of war against it simply to justify domestic spending? It would be an international outrage, and absurdly transparent. Politicians do not like their tricks to be so obvious any idiot can figure them out with 30 seconds of thought.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
