You can’t have a deficit without spending, kids.

I hear much ado lately from the Democrats about the deal to extend part of the Bush tax cuts, and how this will raise the deficit.  But I think they’ve forgotten a very simple rule:  If you don’t spend money, you can’t go into debt.  Under Bush, we watched some of the most damaging rises in federal spending, and federal debt in our nation’s history.  This was only topped by his successor who not only increased spending, but opened the flood gates on spending by ramming through all sorts of bills under the guise of rescuing our economy.

Obama’s insistence that his “healthcare reform bill” would not increase the deficit was based on very preliminary CBO estimates, which by the time the bill went into law, had already been changed to show that it was going to be very costly and inflate the deficit.  This was the same as Bush finding out that there was no purchase of yellow cake uranium by Saddam Hussein, yet he still invaded.  Not like, but the same.  Willfully dishonest, and massively costly to the American people.

Yet, here they are, now trying to stick the deficit bill to a sliver of the population that is already taxed at the highest percentage on their wages under the flag of deficit reduction.  But let’s take politics out of this equation… what happens when you increase taxes (lower net pay) on the top 5% of income earners which is responsible for a whopping 37% of the disposable income spent into the economy each year?  If you guessed anything other than that they would have less to spend, and therefor we would see a dip in the economy, you really need to take a basic economics course (or re-take it).

I’ve made my point on a flat tax in the past over and over, as that’s the only fair tax available.  Better yet, a consumption tax with no income tax would be even better.  But this is not my point here in this post.  What my point is, is that the blowhards on Capitol Hill — especially the Democrats — don’t seem to understand that if you want to reduce the deficit, step one is reducing federal spending.  This is a short- and long-term fix.  I believe Glenn Beck said it best, when he said “One party will tax and spend; one party won’t tax but will spend: It’s both of them”.  But here’s where I side a little (read little in the smallest font possible) bit with the GOP, when I believe you do not raise taxes.  First, the federal government has given massive pay increases to many of its employees over the last two years.  Why?  I’m sure we can all speculate.  Second, we have added billions if not trillions to our spending while the economy is down, setting the tone to ask for more money.  But when a drug addict goes on a bender, then says he needs more coke to keep his high, do you then give him more?  No.  So why are we giving more to these people who misspend our money?  Third, these huge spending programs are nothing other than payments in advance for votes later.  Bribery.  I believe that’s illegal last time I checked.  But these guys and gals do this under the guise of “programs” and “incentives”.  I’ve found the best incentive the government can give is to leave me alone, and let me figure out how to use my money… I seem to be able to balance my checkbook just fine.

About 275 years ago, we fought a war against tyranny from afar.  We had a government that was thousands of miles away trying to dictate how we operated, and what we could/couldn’t do is some of the minutia of life.  In order to finance wars, building, etc, they claimed they should add to the tax burden of the people.  Sound familiar in today’s America?  It should.  People are jumping mad about the people in Washington who believe they know better how you should treat your children, how you can spend money, how you can express yourself.  Yet, there are still enough boneheads out there that re-elect these jokers that continue with their bad behavior.  We too can revolt in a modern and civil American way — vote.  All citizens above 18 can do this.  We’re two years away from the next major cycle, but that gives us 2 years to make notes on everyone’s performance that wants to run.  We’ve got a president who was not qualified to serve and has proven that on-the-job-training is useless — he needs to go.  We’ve got Senators that sign a pledge to reject earmarks (and those who refused), and then go insert them into bills — time to go.  Same with Representatives.  Don’t think that it’s too far away.  It’s right here, right now.  Make your voice heard:  You can’t have debt without spending… so stop the spending.

About these ads

One Response

  1. Yes. Good post. Absolutely true and spot on the right mark.

    Nevertheless, there are things (in my opinion) that any modern society should spend taxpayers’ money on (that is after all partly what the representatives are elected to do) but they should NOT be using public money in any way, shape, or form to line their own pockets, to try to secure re-election, or indeed to finance pet schemes and wild ideas in an attempt at social engineering because such things infringe on personal choices and freedom and that is basically none of their damn business!

    However, I don’t believe you’ll ever change the quality of your representatives or what they do until you divorce the power of special interest groups from the election of those representatives. However you manage it, money MUST be taken out of the equation or the vast majority of your politicians are already effectively bought and paid for before they ever take office!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: