That's not what I'm asking. I'm asking if you disagree with my preference that the president and congress put economic recovery ahead of deficit reduction.

You know exactly what I'm answering.

You implied that gov't spending was the way out.    The only ways for that to happen is tax/spend or borrow/spend. 

Regardless of how economic recovery happens*, do you disagree with my preference that the president and congress put economic recovery ahead of deficit reduction?

*Theoretically, they could eliminate ALL income taxes as a way to boost the economy. That wouldn't increase spending, just the deficit.

If income taxes are eliminated, it won't be the government spending the money now will it?

Are you now asking me if I think the economy would recover faster if the people were spending the money rather than the gov't?  Yes, I think it would.    People will spend their money much wiser, simply because they earned it, than the gov't ever could.    I imagine, if that were to happen, that a lot of programs cuts would be in order.  After all, who's going to lend to someone with no source of income?

You're avoiding the question.

Would you prefer that the government put economic recovery ahead of deficit reduction? 

I'd rather deal with an extended recession now than a major security issue and potential total economic collapse 30 years in the future.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/7/2012 4:47:00 PM (view original):
I'd rather deal with an extended recession now than a major security issue and potential total economic collapse 30 years in the future.

See, Mike? That's an answer. I disagree, but it's an answer.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/7/2012 4:47:00 PM (view original):
I'd rather deal with an extended recession now than a major security issue and potential total economic collapse 30 years in the future.

Just curious, what's the security issue?

I'm not avoiding the question.

I'm asking "How do you get to where you appear to want to go?"     Economic recovery while disregarding everything else isn't a solution.   Maybe the gov't should just make more money and give everyone a million dollars.   That would spur spending, right?

That's probably as viable as eliminating all income taxes. I'm curious about priorities. If you're going to hold Obama's statement against him, you would have to prioritize the deficit ahead of economic recovery. If you don't put the deficit ahead of the economy, then Obama made the correct decision, regardless of what he said while on campaign. 

I don't think you can say "THIS is the only thing I'm worried about."       He's the ******* President.   He should be able to multi-task. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/7/2012 4:55:00 PM (view original):
I don't think you can say "THIS is the only thing I'm worried about."       He's the ******* President.   He should be able to multi-task. 

It's an either/or though.

No matter how you do it (tax increases or spending cuts) deficit reduction negatively affects the economy.

It really isn't an either/or situation.   That's first grade-level deductive reasoning.

Cut spending.   Big Bird doesn't make the cut as Romney suggested.    Big Bird doesn't spend a dime to help the economy.

Simplified, I know, but that's the point.   Cuts can be made without affecting spending by the people.   It really can happen like that.

You don't think a massive foreign debt we couldn't possibly pay off if called upon is a security issue?  Both candidates seemed to think it was, along with most people objectively viewing the issue...  If it were all tied up in bonds held within the country it's only a long-term economic risk, but when so much of it is owned by China and other nations that aren't particularly strong allies it is a long-term security risk.

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/7/2012 5:01:00 PM (view original):
It really isn't an either/or situation.   That's first grade-level deductive reasoning.

Cut spending.   Big Bird doesn't make the cut as Romney suggested.    Big Bird doesn't spend a dime to help the economy.

Simplified, I know, but that's the point.   Cuts can be made without affecting spending by the people.   It really can happen like that.

But that money is being used to employ people who use their paychecks to buy stuff.

That's economic activity that is eliminated. Cut enough of it to actual impact the deficit and it becomes a major drag on the economy. Even Romney said so.