It seems that balancing the budget would be a fairly simple thing if Congress and the President would just stop the increase in spending. Obviously they are addicted to spending our tax dollars and the only way to stop them is to replace them or stop their income flow. Stopping their income flow can only be done if there is a balanced budget amendment, debt is capped with no increases and the Fed is stopped from its “quantitative easing” printing of money. It won’t happen with Democrats and RINOs in control.
Excerpt: “They always talk about cuts, cuts, cuts, and everyone’s screaming you can’t cut this, you can’t cut that. But there are no cuts. What they’re talking about is cutting proposed increases. So it’s a real misleading definition when they talk about cuts. Anything we do for future years doesn’t hold water anyway because you can’t tell the next Congress what to do.
“Basically it’s a fraud. If they were serious about it they could freeze the budget and give everybody the same amount of money they got last year.”
Paul maintains that if the federal government went back to 2004 spending levels, we would have a balanced budget right now.
“Even now if you freeze the budget, within about five years it would be balanced again,” he explains. “But nobody’s quite willing to do that because they think they have to have steady increases.
“There’s a strong appetite for government and that is where the problem is. People don’t want to cut back on the militarism or anything that looks like it might cut into the check they’re getting from government, and a lot of people are getting checks from the government.”
Paul tells Newsmax the federal budget has doubled in 10 years because “the appetite for government never ends. There are more retired people because of the demographics, less people coming into the workforce. Unemployment rates go up so the benefits go up automatically. It’s endless.
“And there are always new programs. There are hundreds and hundreds of programs that are brand new. They just won’t stop. It’s like an addiction. I don’t think they realize the seriousness of this problem.”
Paul is disappointed that most Republicans who were backed by the tea party in 2010 voted for the budget bill.
If Republicans take control of the Senate in the 2012 elections next year, Paul was asked, will that change anything regarding reckless spending?
“Let’s hope so, but there’s no guarantee,” he responds.
“When George Bush was in charge and we had the Senate and the House, we didn’t do a very good job.
“Then the battle becomes between the two factions within the Republican Party, the conservatives versus the big spenders. It depends on who shows up in the Senate. But certainly the way it’s formulated right now there’s no way the conservatives can win a fight and have the Senate support it and then have the president sign a bill.”
Read full Newsmax.com article here.