Tuesday, January 5, 2010

The Gravest Threat to American Security and Prosperity

There are some who believe the only way to eliminate budget deficits is through increased and SUSTAINED taxation. They seem to have forgotten the simple fact that most American households and businesses, those that remain solvent anyway, do so by foregoing non essential spending when necessary.

There is a rational argument to be made that just reducing spending alone will not be enough to eliminate deficits and reduce our national debt. Getting rid of deficits and reducing the national debt is the only way back to economic health and somehow as a nation we need to figure out a solution to our apparently insatiable desire to go on perpetual national spending binges.

Perhaps if the nation had a group of individuals that actually had any real leadership qualities they would openly and honestly discuss the economic dangers we face. They would also tell the truth about what needs to be done, and then act in principled and ethical ways. H*ll, even independent conservatives who believe in limited government and taxation to fund the proper function of government could accept some increase in taxes to balance our books. The problem is that both Republicans and Democrats are drunk on power and spending money.

The information below is useful, and when understood should scare the h*ll out of all of us.






The following video helps further focus on the huge problem hanging like an albatross around our individual and national neck.





Isn't about time all Americans gets serious about our heroin like addiction to spending , and perhaps when we do think about increasing taxes when the economy can support it? Using additional tax revenue to PAY DOWN the deficits and the federal debt. Then reducing taxes again after we have regained fiscal sanity and placed limits on the governments ability to return to the fiscal insanity of the past?

Via: The Heritage Foundation

14 comments:

  1. The realist in me says you're asking for what we will never get RN. A tax increase for debt reduction only.

    If it means anything to you, I support you on this.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you TRUTH. The realist in me causes me to believe you are likely right.

    But the cross of my independent conservative beliefs will cause me to fight on.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think it's far too early to think about a tax increase and we're even further from the point where should try to reduce the deficit.

    IMO we need to grow our way out of the defitcit. IMO again, fiscal policy-govt spending-is the only thing preventing us from sliding into a full on depression. Thanks to the previous administations (plural-both parties-going back 25 years) allowing Wall St/banks/insurance to overtake manufacturing and trade the private sector is in debt up to their asses and imports massively outweigh exports.

    Govt spending is our only hope right now. Grow our way out of debt. The deficit is the least of our problems.The debt is all in our own currency,not foreign. It will continue to be rolled over.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oso - We continue to borrow money from foreign creditors (nations). The value of the dollar continues to decline.

    I don't know when the government, who makes absolutely nothing of value, ever grew us out of anything.

    Thanks to the Federal Reserve (money shufflers), Banks (also shuffling money, and a few years of governmental idiocy and fiscal irresponsibility and presto viola, you have the current U.S. state of affairs.

    Congress needs a serious dusting and cleaning. Then maybe we will see the change necessary to right our ship.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi RN,
    I agree with Congress needing a dusting and cleaning.Maybe wait till Ron Paul takes a day off, turn the place upside down and shake all the sob's out then start all over with RP and some honest people!

    I probably didn't explain what I was trying to say very well,I meant govt spending to spur aggregate demand until consumer confidence returns and the private sector is out of debt and spending and the economy begins to grow again.

    I can't remember the exact figures,I believe in 1950 debt was 120% of our GDP and by 1960 debt was 30% of GDP even though the amount of debt had grown. So as GDP grew the proportion of debt declined. That's what I meant by growing our way out of debt.

    That's assuming our leaders do what's best for the American people and not Wall St-not likely. So I'm probably dreaming.

    ReplyDelete
  6. self-disipline is the key to this problem. we need to elect members of Congress with the self-discipline necessary to regulate themselves on this matter. we have representatives now who are too eager to spend rather than to budget the revenues that come into the treasury.

    and that responsibility falls mainly upon the house of representatives.

    as for tax hikes, i'd agree and i believe the nation would agree to tax hikes but only after they were convinced that Congress had done all it could to rein in excessive expendatures.

    but that would mean that no new programs be added until that time when debt was at a managable level again.

    it would also mean that the people has to make this a priority on their list of qualifications for electing representatives. until they do, the representatives that we elect will continue to spend as if the taxpayer has unlimited sources of income to tax.

    so the ultimate responsibility falls upon the shoulders of the voters.

    and until we begin to accept that responsibility instead of blaming wall street or some other entity government will never be as it should be. blaming wall street does not hide the fact that we elected them and that they occupy that seat of power becaause we elected them not because wall street appointed them.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Griper - Points well made, and I agree. I do hold the financial institutions responsible for a share of our current difficulties as well.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Until we find a way to elect unselfish people who aren't worried about reelection, none of the ideas espoused by The Griper have much of a chance of going anywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  9. already showed you a way, truth. we, the people, must make it a priority in our qualifications for voting in a representative. and focus it on the house of representatives where they are up for reelection every two years.

    if we are electing selfish representatives that selfishness reflects upon the voters attitude more than the representative's attitude.

    ReplyDelete
  10. TRUTH AND Griper - At the risk of being misunderstood;

    I am not a fan of selflessness or sacrifice for both result in the loss of self and creates unhappiness.

    Selfishness is defined in objectivist thought as "concern for ones rational self interest." This requires one to think long term, and often beyond the immediacy of the wallet.

    ReplyDelete
  11. whether selfishness is defined in the terms of a objectivist viewpoint or from the classical viewpoint, that: selfishness is concern for one's self interest only, without thought for others, we still must evaluate it from both, the short term effects or value as well as the long term effects or value.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Griper - by adding "only without thought for others." changes the meaning of the words I wrote and is misleading.

    If one thinks deeply on what is meant by selfishness as related to rational self interest, one can see that it goes far beyond the superfluous meaning usually attributed to the word.

    ReplyDelete
  13. my addition was not meant to change your meaning my friend but give it the meaning usually attributed to the word for purpose of comparison. in other words;

    objectivism
    concern for one's rational self interest.

    classical;
    concern for one's rational self interest only, without thought for others.

    my bad for lack of clarification.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Griper - Thanks, understood.

    Objectivism looks at the issue differently, and I believe correctly. Objectivist see selfishness as a virtue. "The Virtue of Selfishness", by Ayn Rand is an excellent book on the subject. If you like philosophy I highly recommend it.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.