Reduce spending or increase taxes

With our out-of-control debt, there has been a lot of debate over the best approach to handle everything. Should we raise taxes or reduce our spending? I would say both, but I put a strong emphasis on cutting spending.

As I have said repeatedly over the years, big government can get in the way of our rights. We are spending a fortune to harm citizens. If we want to save money, we should stop the harm.

I have also said that the future is more valuable than the present. I don’t want to have to face higher taxes, but I feel that future generations will be better off if we can pay down the debt. Increasing taxes can help, but the government can’t be trusted. Any taxes to address the debt should be temporary and conditional. The concern here is that increases in taxes, even when the debt is a consideration, don’t seem to do any good. Maybe some have reduced deficits immediately after passing, but the government always sees extra revenue as an opportunity for extra spending.

I’m not entirely sure how to properly set conditions on taxes, and these taxes should not exist without conditions. Perhaps serious limits on new spending (no major programs), requirements to reduce deficits every year until we start a surplus then keep the tax only as long as the government runs a surplus, and a guarantee that the tax will expire once the debt is paid off (since the purpose of the tax is to pay off the debt).

Like I said, I prefer spending cuts. Cutting spending is better for our rights, and can lead to a more sustainable situation for future generations. We should not increase taxes any more than 50% of spending cuts, and that is a serious compromise. We should really target at most 10%.

There is one other alternative that I can think of. If we can’t get our government under control, we should break our ties and start fresh. I am openly supportive of secession. This wouldn’t just get us out of the financial mess, but it would also help restore the rights that are under attack by a large, oppressive government. The only problem is that I live in a “blue state.” I’m not entirely convinced that a state that elects the over-the-top anti-individual party would support the reestablishment of individual rights.