Romney says reducing Gov't spending will cause a recession

"Well because, if you take a trillion dollars for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5 percent. That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression. So I'm not going to do that, of course," Romney

"I don't want to have us go into a recession in order to balance the budget," Romney

Fiscally (at least) Romney is a clone of President Bush and President Obama. Government spending = GDP is merely a slight of hand farce! He is the product of the same Wall Street institutions that promoted the others to the Presidency, and he will dance like a puppet on their strings.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/25/romney-spending-cuts-depression-tea-party_n_1545933.html

We are so (censored).

In order for the Government to spend it must first either fabricate money out of thin air, or spend what it doesn't have via its unlimited credit card and pass the bill onto future generations, or endlessly deflate the value of its currency, or rely upon the rigged game whereby through the magic of declaring our currency the "worlds reserve currency" we dupe foreign countries into buying our purely debt based TBills forever, or lastly, directly and indirectly tax the private sector (where real wealth and productive jobs are created) into oblivion. It currently does all of these wonderful things. The Government does not and cannot make money honestly, as the only way that can be accomplished is by applying labor to things of lesser value and thereby turning them into things of greater value. The Government is therefore a major and ultimately totally unnecessary drain upon the GDP. It is not the engine of GDP growth that it has duped us into believing it is.

I originally came to the Libertarian viewpoint from the Objectivist (Randian) side, but as time goes by I find myself drifting further and further to the anarchist side of Libertarianism, as I begin to realize that Government is not and cannot ever be the solution to to the liberation of the sovereign man. All it is at best is a protection racket.

Is a man any less a slave if he is permitted to vote for his master?

Good post. Makes you kind of bitter though.

I don't think Romney will be a re-run of Bush-Obama, he is too good a manager for that.

Politically it is not possible to correct things quickly unless there is a crash which could very well happen.

Lysander Spooner, a self educated Attorney and Civil War era Abolitionist from the State of Massachusetts wrote this dissertation on the authority of the Constitution (verbalized on YouTube in multiple parts, with part 1 linked here):

franco b wrote:Good post. Makes you kind of bitter though.

I don't think Romney will be a re-run of Bush-Obama, he is too good a manager for that.

Politically it is not possible to correct things quickly unless there is a crash which could very well happen.

POTUS is not a management position.

When the CEO says "Jump", the company says "How high."

When POTUS says "Jump", Congress says "Just hold on a minute here...."

jpete wrote:When the CEO says "Jump", the company says "How high."

I don't know about that. Jon Corzine says he dint no nuffin.

franco b wrote:

jpete wrote:When the CEO says "Jump", the company says "How high."

I don't know about that. Jon Corzine says he dint no nuffin.

Corzine is a lying bag of excrement.

who is laughing all the way to the bank of his choice,(out of this country)with our money.

kevin

Slightly more than 41% of all of the military spending on planet Earth is done by the USA (which has less than 5% of the worlds population). I guess that if he is elected, Mitt Romney will not change this in any way, seeing that it represents a huge chunk of our GDP, and he will not stop any Government spending that might in any way affect our GDP and thereby throw us into a recession. I believe the military represents 59% of all US Government spending. Imagine what level of good and productive wealth creating things the private sector could achieve with that!

To put this into some perspective, China accounts for 7% of the worlds military spending, and Russia accounts for 3.7%.

In this economy, the people that had that money would just sit on it until the election was over. No one wants to invest in a failing economy or country.

kevin

lsayre wrote:Lysander Spooner, a self educated Attorney and Civil War era Abolitionist from the State of Massachusetts wrote this dissertation on the authority of the Constitution (verbalized on YouTube in multiple parts, with part 1 linked here):

[youtube]xxx[/youtube]

Figures the guy was from MA. Must be where this state gets it's anti-Constitutional mindset.

lsayre wrote:Slightly more than 41% of all of the military spending on planet Earth is done by the USA (which has less than 5% of the worlds population). I guess that if he is elected, Mitt Romney will not change this in any way, seeing that it represents a huge chunk of our GDP, and he will not stop any Government spending that might in any way affect our GDP and thereby throw us into a recession. I believe the military represents 59% of all US Government spending. Imagine what level of good and productive wealth creating things the private sector could achieve with that!

To put this into some perspective, China accounts for 7% of the worlds military spending, and Russia accounts for 3.7%.

I just realized that over the past few years the Federal government has been spending roughly 40% more than it takes in via all revenue (I.E. tax) sources combined. That means that with the military being at 59% of Federal spending, essentially 100% of all 'legitimate' Federal tax revenues go to funding the military, and every other function of the Federal Government is funded with money that does not exist. Amazing.

That's what I have been saying all along, if you only have X amount of money coming in & that is chewed up by one source & you still want to cut taxes even more just how in the world is anyone expecting to pay down the debt? Even if you were to cut out every so called entitlement completely you would still never be able to even touch the interest on the debt.