Published: Tuesday, June 28 2011 3:00 p.m. MDT
In my home we have to balance the budget or my wife bust's me. Seems to me a
balanced budget amendment is the only thing that will work. It works for Utah.
Keynsian stimuli have never worked and there are many, many examples. For every
dolar you put in you get 80 cents back. Guess you make it up on volume. The
solution is the free enterprise system. take off the restraints and let it go.
And stop spending!
"We can get a firm handle on future government spending and bring annual
budget deficits back to affordable levels."Yeah? Who's going to
do that? Democrats? Republicans? I have no confidence that ANY politician is
going to make the hard choices that need to be made.I'm generally a
very optimistic person, but I'm having a hard time of it lately.
Jeff and What In Tucket:Spot on! The key issue is that once hooked
on heroin, i.e. debt, the public is loathe to give back the ill-gotten gains the
debt brought, and accept a lower standard of living. Even worse, the new
standard of living sans the debt is even LOWER than it would have been had the
debt never been incurred. The combination of interest payments, principal
payments, and the higher interest rates that result from the debt binge eat into
funds that otherwise would have been available to save or consume. So the
result of more debt will only be a lower long-term standard of living.It's time to take the pain, slow the economy by stopping the spending, and
then get government out of the way of entreprenuers and those who are willing to
work hard. In the end, everyone would be better off.
What are you talking about Mr. Obama? Vice President Biden announced months ago
that the recession is over, Mission Accomplished! Tax and spend our way to
prosperity. Even Paul Krugman admitted that we need another war like WWII to
turn the economy around as it did in the forties. I hope it was hyperbole, our
three current wars are more than enough.
With Obama at the helm its like having Lloyd Christmas driving the train over
the edge of the canyon. Dumb and dumber. Obama was supposed to be soooo smart
but then reality set it and people realized this green horn had zero experience
with anything other than community organizing. No experience as a governor. No
experience as a CEO. Only 1 year as a congressman. It doesn't get any greener
than that. And we all elected him?? Is anyone surprised with the state of the
union? You shouldn't be. The blame Bush crowd wore out that card 18 months ago
and are now left grumbling silently as to why Obama and his wealth
redistribution - spend and borrow - economic insanity is doing exactly as many
predicted it would. There ain't no magic here folks, capitalism is being
strangled to death by Obama and the ONLY remedy is to cut our losses and start
over with a new president who actually knows something about economics and
capitalism..... and who isn't a socialist.
Excellent commentary by Mr. Thredgold. Points very well made.
The sky if falling, the sky is falling.Pffft!!!
What was the threshold number that so alarmed the Republicans?
$12,000,000,000,000? $13,000,000,000,000? Certainly not $10,000,000,000,000.When the Republicans took over from the Clinton presidency, there was a
surplus. A debate arose concerning what to do with the surplus. The extreme left
wanted to use the money as a down payment for government programs. The right
wanted to return it to "the American people" with almost all of the
tax cuts going to the upper 5%. Some in the middle wanted to gear the tax break
towards the consuming middle class. If people are buying then things are being
made. The right won. The tax cuts to the wealthy did not pay for itself nor did
it trickle down. No new jobs were created but the wealthy increased their share
of the national wealth. Now all of the sudden the world is coming to an end
unless we cut spending. And the Republicans would rather that happen than to
undo the tax cuts to the wealthy. Well, let come to an end.
How scary--obama's in the drivers seat. Put on your seat belts.
Interesting ramblings and FDRfan I love revisionist history and unbias analysis,
Cutting spending will only hasten the economic collapse. Put on your seatbelts
and hang on. It's necessary but it will be painful. Let's clean up this mess.
Let's just blame the teacher unions...
This article is so glib. There are two parts to the business of government:
income and expenses. This article only focuses on the expenses of the US gov.
But what about income? Nowhere here does the writer note that the Republican
Senate cried like a baby until the Bush tax cuts were extended. The
non-extension of a temporary tax cut on the rich certainly would have brought
money into the coffers, allowing the debt to be paid down. Where is the
discussion on that point? Where is the discussion on the fact that the richest
individuals in the US have an effective tax rate of 15-20% thanks to the capital
gains rate? I'm a CPA so I see this firsthand every year. It's extremely
unfair to the rest of us not blessed enough to be trust-fund babies.While the writer didn't come right out and say he's an Obama-hating
Republican, it's quite clear. Deseret News, care to employ me to write about
the other side of the debate? Or are we only concerned with one side?
L left out the group that wanted to use the surplus to pay down the debt. That
was the other side to Keynesian economics. The burden to reverse the trend of
deficit budgets must be shared but STARTING with reversing the Bush tax cuts for
the top 5%.
Pagan, Obama has set a worlds record for spending and you keep
giving history lessons on George Bush. Wer'e spending ten million dollars a day
fighting in Libya and have tripled the amount of troops in Afganistan the past
two years. We need to fix the problem and quit playing the blame game.
Obama talks about cutting out national debt by $2 trillion over 10-years .....
while requesting a $1.4 tillion increase this year in our debt ceiling. Makes a much sense as an alcoholic asking for more booze to help him
kick his drinking addiction.
FDRfan,It's true that saving and building up a reserve during
plentiful times is a necessary side to Keynesian economics, and if that doesn't
happen, Keynesian economics will fail. Two points though:Do you
ever see the American people (or government, for that matter) ever being
responsible enough to not spend the surplus when they have it? Even if we had a
huge surplus, the government would find something to spend it on. Keynesian
economics is completely unrealistic based on that alone.Clinton's
surplus is a nice talking point, but not quite as rosy as most people think. It
was fueled on a massive economic bubble which burst shortly after he left
office, not to mention the fact that most of the surplus was only projected,
based on the current economic conditions. Anyone familiar with the dotcom burst
would know that those conditions changed rapidly shortly after he left
office.Still, even a projected surplus is better than what we have
now. I'd rather have Clinton than Bush or Obama, and that's saying something.
As we listen to the constant bickering about what to cut here and who to tax
there, I am amazed that never once has cuts to foreign aid been mentioned. I am
tired of sending millions and billions to foreign countries, especially ones who
are happy to take our aid while plotting to kill Americans. It's time for the
United States to quit trying to buy allies and take care of its citizens here at
I agree with you on all points. The objective is to have the discipline to do
what is right. The problems are a non engaged electorate, spin masters and hired
guns as talk show hosts. Just pay attention to the state of agitation and hatred
from those who regularly listen to such shows. Can we expect rationality from
To "Pagen | 9:24 p.m." wow, that is one of my favorite dead horses
that you continue to beat.First off, Bush did not double the debt
compared to the 2000 debt levels. In 8 years Bush increased the debt by $4.3
Trillion, which means that the debt increased by 77%, or a factor of 1.77. Now,
so that we have the same comparison point, since Obama has been in office, using
the 2009, 2010, and 2011 budget years only, the debt will increase by $5.158
Trillion in 3 years, and by the end of the 2012 budget year is expected to be
close to $6.4 Trillion. So, 4 years of Obama gets us nearly 50% more debt than
8 years of Bush.So, can you tell us why Obama is so great if he is
outspending Bush at a rate of over 2 to 1?If Bush's unfunded war is
so bad, why is Obama's so good? See "Obama's Unauthorized war on Libya
costs $9,421,000 a day: Are you getting your money's worth" in the LA
Times.So, if what Bush did was wrong, why is it that Obama is good
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments