Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

cavassi asked in Social ScienceEconomics · 10 years ago

Does "living by our means" mean that we should lower benefits to the poor & reduce taxes for the wealthy and?

corporations?

Update:

Kaya: As another member on Yahoo has shown, most of the money borrowed by the government was borrowed from the coffers of Social Security and Medicare. So, the government seeks to REDUCE benefits from those already received by older people on Medicare and LOWER taxes to wealthy corporations/indviduals, basically taking from the poor and the old to give to the rich. When the government sought to reduce welchers from socal security they found that a large majority, from 87 to 93% of the people were qualified and/or disabled. Those who advocate for tax benefits for corporations and the wealthy argue what they save will result in higher employment, but a friend of mine has found that higher taxes leads to higher employment and lower taxes leads to lower employment. Any congressman who argues otherwise is getting his facts from a talk show host who has no evidence. This mess we are in is NOT from trying to benefit the poor and elderly.

4 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 4
    10 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The phrase "living within our means" means that the government should only spend as much money as it makes. We are currently running on a deficit (spending more than we make) and the idea is that there are always tradeoffs. You can't reduce taxes for the wealthy (earn less money) and increase benefits for the poor (spend more money). As the wealthy have a lot more political power than the poor, most politicians choose to earn less money by cutting taxes for the wealthy, and spend less money by cutting benefits for the poor. However, the phrase isn't very accurate when it comes to our government's current financial state, because our country is many trillions of dollars in debt, so we will have to significantly raise taxes on everyone (earning more money) and cut things like military spending or Social Security payments to the wealthy elderly (spend less money) to try and get out of debt.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    Living within our means includes being fiscally responsible. I don't think cutting aid to the poor should be the highest on our list of "pork". I would guess one could find plenty of wasted money piled in the budget other than the traditional targets.

  • 10 years ago

    Yes. Cavassi, you are laughably ignorant. You need to go back to the minors and learn the basics before having opinions.

  • Anonymous
    10 years ago

    It means just pay as you go,but not by debts.If things go wrong,the poor have a priority to go first.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.