A substantial part of most American's household budget (except for the budgets of old money Republicans, like
Robin Hayes) is interest expense. What sets the cost of money? Is it something the government can do something about? Just what do people who complete an economics degree like
Larry Kissell, the netroots endorsed Democratic candidate for NC-08, learn that football players who drop out don't?
The price of everything is set by supply and demand. The more of it there is, the lower the price. The more people that want it, the higher the price. Now, the government can increase the supply of money, but this leads to inflation. What can the government do about reducing the demand?
That's easy. Stop borrowing so much. We are borrowing literally billions for the Occupation in Iraq. It needs to stop. The borrowing is the "demand" on the cost of money. When it stops, interest payments will go down. That is money directly in the pockets of the "taxpayers" (who, in this district, typically pay more in interest than taxes every year).
The Republican party won the South by arguments having the same form as this one.
How do we deflect the counterargument that perhaps we ought to cut social spending? By saying that any further cuts in social spending will result in increased crime, which will cost us even more money to incarcerate those people.
Make your arguments simple and your premises uncontroversial as possible. Show people what is in it for them, because that is what they really care about.