Not really, no.

40% of US GDP is related to government spending (local, state, federal). The R's talk big about cutting spending but even they can't bring themselves to actually do it. The "Tea Party" doesn't fully understand the ramifications of how we've set up our currency (debt in reality becomes money, reduce debt you reduce your money supply, reducing economic development).

Taxes at the federal level serve a few purposes 1) a way to control inflation - print too much money (issue debt) and inflation increases. Do too little of it and the economy contracts. 2) Incentivize behavior such as home buying and child rearing.

Look at Japan's issue with an aging/declining population and the methods they are trying to employ to reverse it!

What you'll find is most higher educated, higher earning adults vote Democrat. The Republic base is the lower educated, and poorer areas of our country (just look at the Fox News demographics!). I always laugh when pilots, whom tend to be higher educated and earn more than your average worker (except maybe for the commuter guys) identify with the Republican base.

The reason that children are good for the economy is that they eventually get jobs of their own, and contribute to the economy. While they are kids, their parents have to spend a lot to raise them. Economies with a declining population do terribly (Japan)

Having kids is a huge boost to the economy. Kids are expensive and then they grow up, get a job and pay taxes to pay for their parents Medicare and SS. Thus, the govt rewards patents for having kids by way of tax breaks. It's just the way the system is

It's not the increase in the population that is the problem.

Yes, it's the decrease in population that is causing deflationary pressure in Japan, or rather contributing to it.

You like kids, I get it. Have all you want, but pay for them yourself.

That's how you screw a population, divide them up over arbitrary issues, and then steal their money. That's exactly what is happening. The divide between D and R, is over social issues, not financial.

A great example is the debate of whether or not global warming is real. It's hilarious for me to watch because it doesn't matter if it is real or not. So the Earth is warming, who cares, the negative effects are a huge lie. The place I'm sitting at right now had two miles thick of ice on top of it not to long ago. When Niagara Falls reaches lake Erie, the Great Lakes will drain away, give me billions to save them. Welcome to planet Earth.

Thanks Keith. Way to help unify the pilot group. I bet you're a joy to be around.


































http://www.troll.me/images/stifler-t...as-sarcasm.jpg

....and no one ever in the history of history has ever had kids and THEN fallen on hard times?

Then there are certain institutions that are against practicing birth control....

Having kids is not as simple as "can we afford a child for the next 18+ years?"
If YES, then have kid
If No, do not have kid

Married 7 years, no kids.

But I recognize the economic benefit a growing population entails.

So in your mind, a negative population growth is something the government would be okay with?

The government ponzi scheme depends upon population growth.

I, however do agree about the drain on society part. The wrong demographics are doing most of the breeding.