Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

Sponsor

To: DMaA who wrote (473900)	2/25/2012 12:58:35 PM
From: MrLucky	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 536168

<I believe Paul is serious about it.> I do not question him being serious. I question his ability to get it done. One does not shut down a cabinet and it's department without finding out a place for the people. What usually happens is that they sell us on the idea to create a new department which will solve all that ails us and ends up merging the other department into it. Homeland Security is the most recent example. Transportation is another. The actual affect has been to enlarge budgets and costs to the taxpayer with service and performance being little different than if they were still done by the initial grouping of agencies etc. Most everyone has heard the cliche: "Moving the chairs around on the Titanic".

To: DMaA who wrote (473900)	2/25/2012 5:21:02 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 536168

I haven't checked this site out thoroughly, but I see Erskine Bowels and Alan Simpson are on their board. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget crfb.org has determined that of all the candidates, Ron Paul has the best plan for reining in federal spending. "...The study analyzed each candidate’s budget and tax plans through three economic lenses — an optimistic low-debt scenario, an intermediate-debt scenario, and a pessimistic high-debt scenario. At the intermediate level, the results project that (Ron) Paul’s proposed tax policies and cost-cutting policies would add $5.6 trillion to the debt over the next nine years, but his spending policies would decrease the debt by $7.5 trillion. With this, interest on the debt would be lower by $300 billion, adding up to an overall decrease of $2.2 trillion..."