Do we still not understand how dangerous it is to allow government to grow unchecked as we shackle ourselves with massive debt -- a good portion of which is held by foreign nations who don't necessarily like us? If we can't balance the budget today, what on earth makes us think it will happen at some future date? The solution is staring us in the face. We need to rein in spending today, and don't tell me there is nothing to cut when we know every omnibus bill is loaded with pork and kickbacks.
The usual disclaimers -- I don't accept the "we," "ourselves" and "us" parts, since I have neither authorized any politician to rack up debt in my name nor have any intention of accepting an obligation to pay off said debt, etc.
But as far as it goes, she's right.
Ryan's budget proposal, which the usual Democratic suspects are already busy labeling "draconian" and so forth, is the usual, completely non-serious, crap.
If the politicians want to balance the budget, here's how to do it:
- Make a sober estimate of next year's revenues (perhaps based on last year's revenues);
- Draw up a budget which spends less than that amount;
- Stick to that budget unless -- and only unless -- revenue shortfalls force you to revise it downward (any unexpected revenue windfalls can go to paying down debt principal).
Yeah, it's really that simple.
Ryan's budget proposal increases spending for the next two years. Then, based on rosy revenue projections and the silly notion that subsequent congresses will consider themselves bound by Paul Ryan's plan (when in fact he won't even consider himself bound by it if he's still in Congress three years from now), it supposedly takes eight more years to hit point (2) above.
Sound familiar? It's the thing the Republicans offer up every year.
Every year, Republicans think that if they offer a budget that doesn't decrease spending for two years, the Democrats will quit whining about "draconian cuts." They should know better. To all Democrats (and most Republicans, especially if the word "defense" is mentioned anywhere in the area under consideration) any cut is "draconian." Heck, it doesn't even have to be a cut at all to be a "draconian cut" -- any proposed reduction in future spending increases is a "draconian cut" too.
Every year, Republicans promise that their proposal will balance the budget ... some day, a long time from now ... with no pain involved for anyone. Not only should they know better, they do know better. But they think you're stupid enough not to know better.
Post a Comment