Eliminating government jobs would have a negative impact on not only the money supply, but also demand. Whenever a Job is lost it hurst the economy, but only through the process of creative destruction can such a loss become justified.
You can't ballance the budget without either raising taxes or cutting Gov't jobs.
What makes you so sure? Do you have some econometric budgeting model, or some kind of evidence to test your hypothesis?
I know it is possible to reduce the Budget Deficit by making programs more efficient, and such an example can be found in the recent Student Loan Reform. This reform not only takes away federal contracts from banks, but also enables the Federal Government to directly control student loans. The conservative estimate is that this move will save 80 Billion dollars each year. Thus it is possible to reduce the deficit without raising tax's, or cutting spending.
The implications of my student loan example would mean that cutting spending, or raising tax's should not be the first option. After all if a program can be made more efficient than it could potentially reduce the deficit. Now That is some really creative thinking on my part, but more importantly i have ascended the "raise tax's/cut spending" dogma that exists. I am dam proud of my accomplishment =)
Congratulations, you turned a 10 ft mountain of trash into a 9.9997 ft Mountain of trash. Lets celebrate the brilliance of Hoffman and what significant accomplishment he has done. Never mind the fact that the other 99.997% is still there.
Yes efficiency shoudl be the first thing on the plate but the savings are minuscule and so you have to either raise taxes, cut spending or both to achieve any significant gains in cutting the deficit. I understand and appreciate your point but the reduction you would see is small and only a drop in the bucket, so I hope you will forgive my passion.
