Manifesto 2.0, yo!

1. If a large corporation were to go out of business, causing severe problems of unemployment and greatly disrupting the market, should the federal government subsidize them?
In my opinion, this depends on how the large corporation behaved in the market before they lost control. If I were the federal government, I would hire economists to evaluate the situation and predict the future of the corporation. If the economists believed that the catastrophe was incidental, and that the business would flourish within a subsidy, then I would provide them the money. On the other hand, if the corporation destroyed itself due to a lack of effort and foolish actions, then I would deny them the right to come back and worsen the economy. However, the federal government needs to be careful in which business they determine is a wise choice for the economy because of the USA's constant increase in expenditures over the years. The national debt has reached an all time high of $16 trillion dollars. The federal government cannot afford to subsidize a corporation that will fail in the market again. This will only lead to an increase in debt, and put the economy at risk for plummeting into depression once more. 

2. After looking at the 2011 budget (revenues & expenditures), my manifesto leads me to support/criticize it because...
My manifesto leads me to criticize this act of avariciousness because the US cannot control its spending in a constructive manner. I understand that there are certain expenditures that are absolutely necessary; however,  there are plenty of other unnecessary expenditures that are being pushed against the debt clock. The US total revenue has not even come close to meeting the total amount in billions spent on expenditures. We have to fix this problem now, or it will only get worse guaranteed. For example, if the US government taxed large corporations higher, the percentage of total revenue would increase. In addition, if the US government cut back on Medicare and Medicaid, the expenditure percentage would lower; therefore, helping lessen the national debt. Overall, Congress needs to discover a solution, or anticipate that the problem will not subside with US involvement. The goal may not be reached for a number of years, but it takes effort now to abolish our debt, for future generations to come.

3. In keeping with my manifesto and after watching the movie I.O.U.S.A. explain the debt crisis faced by our nation, I propose the following solution...
I propose that the US government cuts back on unnecessary expenditures, and involves each US citizen with their insight on the issue. This provides multiple perspectives on the subject. In addition, I would recommend speaking with China and working out a solution to paying back our debt overtime. We'd have to also be patient and persistent, in order to see results over the course of many years. Congress would need to be on the same level as US citizens, and attempt to make a difference through taxes and lower-class assisting laws. It would also be ideal to create an alliance with China, to prevent any possible sparks for World War III, due to our incompetence with money. Whoever believes that we should just leave the economy as it is, and expect to see positive results, is crazy. The main issue here is ignorance. We have to realize now that this is a serious problem. Our future generations of people depend on it. USatiur rpthis xe e ,zycra