Define fiscal conservative...

[Stunt]

More recently I have noticed many more liberal posters (will remain nameless), claim the are indeed fiscal conservatives as they support "balanced budgets". I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation. Therefore this comment is absolutely misleading, it's as if these people are trying to sound mainstream when all their values are indeed tax n' spend, they advocate many social programs and no tax cuts for anybody (except perhaps the poor).

Many scandinavian countries and other very liberal nations have shown to have balanced budgets, yet none of their parties even claim to be true fiscal conservatives. One cannot even use deficit as a parallel for this designation. Liberals stop pretending to be moderate, time to understand what is really meant by fiscal conservatism.

Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

If you don't agree with the above...quit lying.

/rant.

 

[sandorski]

Hmm, I wonder who that could be...

Anyway, I disagree. Fiscal Conservative is just that, being Fiscally Conservative. It doesn't mean Capitalist, Pro-Reduced State, etc as you listed. Those are popular views held by Contemporary American "Conservatives, but are not the definitives of "Fiscal Conservatism". Here's a blurb on Fiscal Conservatism from the Wikipedia:
========================
Fiscal conservatism is not a political philosophy, and more a tradition of prudence in government spending and debt. Edmund Burke, in his 'Reflections on the Revolution in France', articulated its principles:

...t is to the property of the citizen, and not to the demands of the creditor of the state, that the first and original faith of civil society is pledged. The claim of the citizen is prior in time, paramount in title, superior in equity. The fortunes of individuals, whether possessed by acquisition or by descent or in virtue of a participation in the goods of some community, were no part of the creditor's security, expressed or implied...[T]he public, whether represented by a monarch or by a senate, can pledge nothing but the public estate; and it can have no public estate except in what it derives from a just and proportioned imposition upon the citizens at large.

In other words, a government doesn't have the right to run up large debts and then throw the burden on the taxpayer; the taxpayers' right not to be taxed oppressively takes precedence even over paying back debts a government may have imprudently undertaken.
==================

Not nearly as specific in many areas as you have listed. It boils down to Spending with Prudence and within boundaries that are both reasonable from Governments' Revenue position and also reasonable from the Taxpayers ability/desire to Pay.

I'm not "lying" at all, I am using the term quite correctly.

 

[Genx87]

I have believed myself to be a fiscal conservative.
In my view a fiscal conservative will want to control govt spending, not make sure the budget gets balanced by taxing people.

The deficits imo are bad but the only way to expose the tax and spenders is to make the deficit look bad.

 

[1EZduzit]

LOL, I'm fiscally conservative....... on some things. AR, AR, AR!!

Bush and his policies have made everyone want to claim to be a fiscal conservative. Then they can say "Hey, don't blame me, I'm fiscally conservative."

LOL, politics.

 

[judasmachine]

Tax and spend! Tax and spend! Tax and spend!

/World's last true Democrat (watch the Simpsons)

Anyway,
It beats no tax and still spend.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It is interesting to note that this dynamic raged even during the Constitutional Convention, as the Founding Fathers never fully agreed on the balance between a cumbersome federal bureaucracy and the potential for inconsistencies if such responsibilities were disseminated to local government. The Federalist Papers, among others, provide an interesting insight into these discussions.

That being said, neither political party fully embraces fiscal conservatism as you define it: Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

Neither political party can manage to keep its hands out of the cookie jar.

 

[Strk]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
It is interesting to note that this dynamic raged even during the Constitutional Convention, as the Founding Fathers never fully agreed on the balance between a cumbersome federal bureaucracy and the potential for inconsistencies if such responsibilities were disseminated to local government. The Federalist Papers, among others, provide an interesting insight into these discussions.

That being said, neither political party fully embraces fiscal conservatism as you define it: Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

Neither political party can manage to keep its hands out of the cookie jar.

Neither party embraces it as a whole, only individuals. And I think none of us would run out of fingers counting the members of Congress who genuinely practice what they preach.

 

[Legend]

I guess my definition would be someone that believes in low taxes, low spending, and the use of deficit spending on rare ocassions.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Stunt
More recently I have noticed many more liberal posters (will remain nameless), claim the are indeed fiscal conservatives as they support "balanced budgets". I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation. Therefore this comment is absolutely misleading, it's as if these people are trying to sound mainstream when all their values are indeed tax n' spend, they advocate many social programs and no tax cuts for anybody (except perhaps the poor).

Many scandinavian countries and other very liberal nations have shown to have balanced budgets, yet none of their parties even claim to be true fiscal conservatives. One cannot even use deficit as a parallel for this designation. Liberals stop pretending to be moderate, time to understand what is really meant by fiscal conservatism.

Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

If you don't agree with the above...quit lying.

/rant.

I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation
You are wrong about this. The stated goal of the neo-cons is to, as they put it, "starve the beast" by cutting taxes so much that deficits grow to unsustainable levels which they hope will eventually result in a huge decrease in gov't spending and hence government.
It is the actual policies of the Bushies to spend like mad to give their supporters and Americans a false sense of economic well being as well as to bankrupt the government to achieve the neo-cons "starve the beast" plan.

And even a fiscal conservative can support deficits as long as they don't endanger the economic health of the country and have some purpose like funding a needed service or stimulating the economy.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Stunt
More recently I have noticed many more liberal posters (will remain nameless), claim the are indeed fiscal conservatives as they support "balanced budgets". I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation. Therefore this comment is absolutely misleading, it's as if these people are trying to sound mainstream when all their values are indeed tax n' spend, they advocate many social programs and no tax cuts for anybody (except perhaps the poor).

Many scandinavian countries and other very liberal nations have shown to have balanced budgets, yet none of their parties even claim to be true fiscal conservatives. One cannot even use deficit as a parallel for this designation. Liberals stop pretending to be moderate, time to understand what is really meant by fiscal conservatism.

Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

If you don't agree with the above...quit lying.

/rant.

quote: "I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation. "
You're wrong, the Reagan administration purposely decided to cut taxes and increase spending in order to squeeze out social programs. Radical Republicans, stop pretending to be fiscal conservatives.

David Stockman is best known for having referred to supply-side economics as a "trojan horse" used to cut taxes on the wealthy.
"Stockman also admitted to purposefully running up the budget deficit and using it as an excuse to cut spending on domestic programs."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stockman

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: Stunt
More recently I have noticed many more liberal posters (will remain nameless), claim the are indeed fiscal conservatives as they support "balanced budgets". I want point out; no political party has a goal to put the country into a deficit situation. Therefore this comment is absolutely misleading, it's as if these people are trying to sound mainstream when all their values are indeed tax n' spend, they advocate many social programs and no tax cuts for anybody (except perhaps the poor).

Many scandinavian countries and other very liberal nations have shown to have balanced budgets, yet none of their parties even claim to be true fiscal conservatives. One cannot even use deficit as a parallel for this designation. Liberals stop pretending to be moderate, time to understand what is really meant by fiscal conservatism.

Pro-capitalism, Pro-reduced state, Smaller social safety net, Lower taxes, Reduced Spending.

If you don't agree with the above...quit lying.

/rant.

Exactly, I get tired of hearing about how fiscally conservative conjur and the like consider themselves...

 

[Rainsford]

While I tend to agree with Stunts ranting definition of fiscal conservatives, I don't think liberals have to use the term to sound mainstream on economic issues. Balancing the budget is hardly a left-wing idea, and is rather independent of spending levels. This concept of deficit spending, as demonstrated by the Republicans, is almost more liberal than the position the actual liberals are taking. Neither side really seems to promote reduced government spending, they simply disagree on WHAT to spend too much money on. But at least liberals want to keep the deficit under control, which seems like a more conservative position to me.

Perhaps in absolute terms, the liberals are off-base, but as they currently seem closer to the economic mainstream than the Republican party, it seems rather appropriate to me.

 

[2Xtreme21]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
LOL, I'm fiscally conservative....... on some things. AR, AR, AR!!

Bush and his policies have made everyone want to claim to be a fiscal conservative. Then they can say "Hey, don't blame me, I'm fiscally conservative."

LOL, politics.

Bush is a fiscal idiot.

 

[HGC]

Current Republican definition of fiscal conservatism: 1. Cut tax rates to encourage economic growth and increase tax revenue. 2. Spend all the new money and much, much, more on buying votes.

Current Democratic definition: 1. Raise tax rates that harm the economy and reduce tax revenues, because appearing to punish the rich might win more votes than actually lifting up the poor. 2. Spend the reduced amount of money and much, much, more on buying votes.

An honest definition: 1. Keep tax rates as low as feasible to keep the economy strong and revenues high. 2. Limit federal spending so we run minor deficits or surpluses.