If they can ban guns, why can't they ban deficit spending?

[Face da Change]

Spend what you have, not what you'd like to have.

[Victor]

So you want to raise taxes to the point that we are taking in what we spend?
Okay

[EconomicsGeek]

The Congress votes on taxes, expenditures and loans. Any ban on this would be unconstitutional... In the case of guns, we can make a very good case that banning certain types of guns do not infringe upon people's right to "keep and bear arms." The Constitution allows you to own and carry your guns, but it doesn't specify the type, nor the number or even if we can regulate them using other means. It just says that you can own and carry some weapon. A partial ban or different regulations would be constitutionally valid.

Besides, banning the deficit would be very stupid. You need to increases the deficit when demand is low -- and this can mean doing for years when we talk about a financial crisis.

To the guy bellow:
Hard decisions that are needed? That's a good one.

If you didn't realize, even historical lows on interest rates do not spur investment... And there's a reason for that: many people are hugely indebted. If the government stops buying, the private sector won't suddenly turn into a gold mine. They will not buy much more than they presently do.
Furthermore, people's job depends on consumption -- without buyers, you do not produce. Given the marginal impact of each individual firm over an entire economy, they will not run deficits to hire people until private individuals can afford their service... they'll do as any business in short run micro: you fire people to cut down on your production costs; in the long run, you close sections of your companies or you lock it all for good.

So, not only will your cuts lessen the output -- it will effectively drive the country into a new recession --, but much of your initial cuts will be offset by the waste you created: people who do not work, resources which are not used, capital which is not invested... what you fail to produce is also a waste. Under some conditions, you could offset your entire initial savings with this waste, making your financial position even worst than it initially was.

As for the "it is needed," learn to do the maths. The inflation is low, but it's well above 1%; the interest rates on yearly bonds is less than 1% since 2008. What do you conclude? In real terms, investors are paying the government for the government to use their own money. And it is economically impossible that the US government will fail to pay back... it is politically possible if Republicans are stupid enough to force a default with the debt ceiling, but it's not economically possible right now.

For a measure of that, use markets. Rational agents discount uncertainty from the value of their transaction -- that is, they'd need more interest than usual if the payment was uncertain. Where are interest rates? At historical lows.

It means that, well, you do not know what you are talking about.

[Sam]

The deficit spending ban, and the gun ban would both be unconstitutional.

[El Capitan]

Well, your question isn't great buddy. Guns and deficit spending aren't particularly related in any way are they? A government could conceivably ban anything they wanted.

I mean, you could have said 'If they can ban guns, why can't they ban eating cheese on a Wednesday?'

[Darwin]

The question is gibberish.

[Mr. Hamilton]

Well the answer to that is long and complex. But lets just say that 60+% of yearly federal spending goes to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Welfare, Food Stamps, etc. Since the nation now relies on such ridiculous spending, balancing the budget is demonized by the left as "pushing grandma over a cliff", or "killing children and the homeless". So when 2/3 of the people in washington use name calling and the media pushes the liberal "your going to kill grandma" agenda...its really hard to get public support to make the hard decisions that are needed.

[immensepark826]

well... they could... but we may have lost the cold war and certainly wouldn't have started the Iraq war and Afghan war?

and how much would you cry about that?