What people are saying about the quiz Discuss Question 29

Discuss Question 30

30. FISCAL WISDOM: Elected officials should be willing to reach across the political aisle and work for a principled based compromise where all major elements of the federal budget are on the table, even if it’s contrary to wishes of their party leadership, in order to enhance fiscal responsibility and ensure sustainability over time.

ANSWER: True – Also a no brainer. But politics, partisanship and rigid ideology get in the way of real progress. Politicians must be willing to reach across the political aisle and work for principle-based compromise; otherwise the solutions necessary will not get done until a crisis is at our doorstep. The challenges our fiscal imbalances pose are real, and continued partisanship will threaten our country’s standing in the world, the strength and competitiveness of our economy, our future standard of living and even our domestic tranquility over time.

 

11 Responses to “Discuss Question 30”

  1. gary says:

    I do not want my politicians “reaching across the isle” to progressives any more. I want to defeat them in elections and be rid of them. The I can use my Nancy Pelosi line ” We won, shut up” : ) or my Obama line, ” elections have consequences and I won”

    • Chris Mc says:

      Agreed! Compromise always means conservatives lose and liberals win. If not, we wouldn’t have the problems we have today. How do you compromise on war — do you just deal with every other threat? Do you just win every other battle? Do you just shoot every other enemy? On abortion, do you just kill every other unborn infant? On spending programs, do you just spend on every other giveaway program? On personal responsibility, do you just accept every other responsibility? On accountability, are you just accountable for every other action you take? On cutting down government, do you just cut down every other wasteful program? On common sense, do you just embrace every other idiotic idea? On socialism and free market capitalism, do you just nationalize every other industry? On the Constitution, do you just negate every other Amendment? I also agree this survey was thought provoking, but had it not been for the fine-line true and false answers on the stats, I would have scored a thousand. This survey should be billed as ‘how well do you trust government numbers.”

      Reply
      • Andy says:

        Agreed Chris!

        This question screamed out at me — they clearly painted this question to nudge a “sensible person” to allow for further raises in taxes. Did you see France suggest a 5% increase in their VAT? I suppose it was a compromise!

  2. kerry says:

    This quiz offers no data and questions are leading. I’m a sixsigma with q/a background… this survey is fun but not leaning.

  3. Dennis Sidwell says:

    You are correct. In real life the compromises means we loose and then we loose some more. I recently asked a candidate for my state senate office if she would reach across the isle to make things happen. I was happy when she said no. Good for her and I will vote for her. Go Dedee.

  4. Brennan says:

    We’ve had enough compromise. We need leaders with morals who are doing this for what they believe is for the greater good, not philosophical ideology. If you are a true moral person who has a relationship with Jesus Christ, there is no compromise. You have to do what He tells you is right. He holds you up to very high standards and expects you to uphold His truth and not compromise His law.

  5. Jody says:

    I don’t understand the rationale of the preceding posts. If we don’t compromise, then there will be no solutions. We are a divided country, so we need to stop dreaming about electing a Congress and President that all agree with one point of view. It’s not going to happen. Elections do have consequences, but what we really need to demand from our politicians is integrity. Compromise is not a dirty word. Our democracy depends on it.

  6. Andy says:

    Compromise is camoflage for increase taxes and “promise” to cut spending. I, for one, am sick of the dangling carrot. I find it incredulous that sheeple still fall for this word.

    OK – I’ll support “compromise” ONLY if their is a ceiling on taxes and spending. I can’t buy a house if the payment is higher than 36% of my take home pay (max), so the Feds shouldn’t be able to spend more than 18% of the previous year’s GDP.

    If our country is so divided, then cut WAY back on the Feds, and allow States to govern themselves. In this way, the socialists (redistributors) and capitalists can choose where to participate. It’s the ever-growing intrusion by the Federal Government that is creating such a divide. Conservatives CAN’T compromise their way to socialism…

    My prediciton – shrink the Federal Government and you’ll shrink the divisiveness.

    Reply
  7. Ralph says:

    If you only want spending reductions and the opposition offers less reductions then you ask for and recommends making up the difference with revenue increases is not a compromise! You just became a loser.

  8. Tom says:

    The first few posts demonstrate the complete obstinacy of the Republicans. When have Republicans compromised? Obama compromised up the wazoo on the stimulus and got three stinking votes. He compromised up the wazoo on health care reform (no single payer, the Heritage mandate, no public option) and got nothing. You can’t compromise with these people.

Leave a Reply