Some corrections seem to be in order here.
I'm just curious about how the Tea Party intends to lower the deficit while cutting spending AND lowering taxes. Cutting spending works while income remains steady. It doesn't work if your net income is still 0. Or in this case negative numbers.
Lowering the deficit in this way works if you cut spending faster than you cut taxes. I should think this would be obvious.
I don't get it. Is there some disconnect where Tea Party members don't know what taxes are for? Do roads just pop into existence? Lights. police, schools, etc?
You're conveniently forgetting everything else that drains the budget. Social security, national defense, interest on the debt, executive departments, etc. are much higher on the list. In fact, many cities are raising taxes and cutting back on road work, maintenance, etc. because public pensions require such a large share of the pie.
Lowering the deficit works when you cut faster then you spend yes, but lets get serious. The US does not cut faster then it spends, ever. The military budget alone is atrociously high. The only way cutting spending will work while the US covers is various budget commitments would be to keep taxes constant. Or even raise them. The problem is, the American people have become addicted to low taxes and high service. In essentials, the philosophy of the tea party would be that 1=4. You get what you pay for, which nicely ends up at the infrastructure concerns in the second point. Roadwork maintenance, utilities, law enforcement and education are the most important things in the budget. They are the building blocks of modern civilization, and when they crumble, so to falls everything else. That represents a serious misappropriation of resources if the base parts of civilization come in second to for example, the military. Social security is useless if the people you're helping can't use the aid money to access services because the roadways are crumbling. In addition, failed education means more people on welfare etc etc. I think theres a major issue when more money is appropriated to fixing the symptoms while cutting money from fixing the problem.
America has since Reagan run on the tax philosophy 1=4. It doesn't work. These services CANNOT all be maintained with the retardedly low tax rates in the States. Things wouldn't have to be cut at all, and America wouldn't be nearly as far in debt if taxes hadn't been slashed a stupidly high amount. As for what is getting cut now, I guess it's a matter of opinion, but like I said, I think roads and education are far more important then how many nukes can be launched at once.
As for the comment earlier that roads could be provided by private enterprise, I'm not saying they couldn't. But there are two scenarios for that:
Government contracts private enterprise to build road.
Company builds road and charges you at a toll booth.
You're paying for both, either through tolls or taxes. And in the case of the toll booth, how long does it take for one company to start controlling a bunch of roads and jack the toll price up?
The only sensible option is for the government to contract business, but once again, it needs the money to do it.