Originally Posted by hrdman2luv

Originally Posted by hrdman2luv

WASHINGTON – Alan Greenspan says the country can't afford tax cuts of the magnitude proposed by Republican presidential contender John McCain — at least not without a corresponding reduction in government spending.

"Unless we cut spending, no," the former Federal Reserve chairman said Friday when asked about McCain's proposed tax cuts, pegged in some estimates at $3.3 trillion.

"I'm not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money," Greenspan said during an interview with Bloomberg Television. "I always have tied tax cuts to spending."

McCain has said that he would offset his proposed cuts — including reducing the corporate tax rate and eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax that has plagued middle-class families — by ending congressional pork-barrel spending, unnecessary government programs and overhauling entitlement programs such as Medicare and Social Security.

Democrats pounced on Greenspan's comments, in part because McCain professed last year that he was weaker on economics than foreign affairs and was reading Greenspan's memoir, "The Age of Turbulence," to educate himself.

Full Article Here:

I'd just like to say that Ron Paul "told you so"

Originally Posted by Iriemon

I gotta say at least God bless Greenspan. In this age of all that seems to matter is who can cut taxes the fastest, he is one of the few prominent persons that at least brings up the issue of the deficits and the long term costs the exploding debt has.

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Yes, he is a great supply-sider. Too little regulation of Fannie, Feddie and the sub-prime fiasco, however.

Originally Posted by winston53660

What did Greenspan have to do with that?

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Quite a bit. He was in favor of de-regulation and did not supervise banks closely in their investing (one of the Fed's main duties.) This allowed for them to provide high risk mortgages, slice them up into packaged commodities, sell them on the market and spread risk. This snowballed to banks loaning money to people who had absolutely no business buying a home. "Stated income loans" became the fashion, with no money down. This of course exploded and we as tax payers are picking up the bill.

In his book he says he kept things loose becaue he saw the importance of property rights in the fabric and future of America and wanted as many people to own a home as possible. Not a very good excuse if you asked me.

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Yes, he is a great supply-sider. Too little regulation of Fannie, Feddie and the sub-prime fiasco, however.

Originally Posted by Iriemon

He is, but at least he recognized the need to do it within a balanced budget.

He'd say he was in favor of the Bush tax cuts, for which I faulted him (because I didn't think taxes should be cut till the debt was paid down a bit) but only in the context of making comparable spending cuts.

The first part made news, but somehow that latter part never came out through the noise.

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Yes, he cites the failure of Congress to enforce the penalties contained in the Budget Enforcement Act as what caused the spending imbalance. There would be mandatory cuts on all programs if paygo wasn't enforced, an effective deterrant.

McCain says he wants to get this enacted again in that quote I pasted. This would be a very good thing.

Originally Posted by MC.no.spin

Re: Dept of Homeland Security, they are getting rave reviews from mayors, governors and other officials for their efficient and speedy assistance in dealing with the hurricanes Gustav and Ike.

But I'm with you that govt needs to be smaller.