Yesterday in Roger’s Rules, I quoted Barack Hussein Obama’s recent — what to call it? His observation? His promise? His threat? — that
“ . . . next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country, I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficits and debt step-up because I’m calling their bluff.”
Thomas Sowell was quite right to point out that Obama’s gambit was merely prelude to the next installment of the shock-and-awe statism show, coming to a bankruptcy near you. Whenever Democrats start talking about deficits — deficits, nota bene, that they created with their incontinent spending — you know that it is only a bit of throat clearing before they move on to their favorite subject: taking more of your money. As Mr. Sowell notes,
It goes like this: Democrats start spending money wildly, handing out goodies to a wide range of people who they want to vote for them, while Republicans complain about deficits and the national debt. Then, when the public becomes alarmed about the debts that are piling up, the Democrats get the Republicans to vote for higher taxes to deal with the debt crisis, in the name of “fiscal responsibility.”
It’s a mug’s game, to be sure, but it has worked again and again, so stay tuned, and hold on to your wallet.
One thing I did not mention yesterday is how suave the President was in his talk of deficits and “calling their bluff.” Really, I am all admiration for his sleight of hand. His skill in this department was brought home to me by a canny reader who wrote to observe that
“. . . we fall into this trap because we keep talking about deficits, not spending. It is the absolute level of spending and what we are spending on that must be addressed. Then it comes down to, how do we pay for the spending? . . . The debate should be re-directed to spending levels; talking first about deficits is the initial first step down that proverbial slippery slope of higher taxes and slower economic growth.”
Exactly. Which is why the financial commentator Rick Santelli — the man who gave the tea party its name — is once again spot on when, with his usual vividness, he exhorted the government to “stop spending, stop spending, stop spending.”
That’s the problem we need to address. Bottom line: do not let Democratic politicians seduce you into talking about deficits. That is only their way of saying: “We need new taxes.” No, keep the conversation focused on spending. They will say: “Aren’t you worried about the deficit? You said you were worried about the deficit. No let’s do something about it. Vote to raise taxes.” Not so fast, pardner! Sure, we’re worried about the deficit. But the way to get the deficit under control is to cut spending.
Cut spending, cut taxes, and you promote growth. Got it? Paul Krugman is too brilliant to understand that. But Milton Friedman wasn’t. And neither, my friend, are you.
Now that we’ve had 200 plus years to observe behavior, I think we must conclude that politicians working within our current system will never stop unless forced to do so. To that end I propose the following amendment to our Constitution:
In any calendar year, the Federal Government may take no more than 15% of GDP in taxation. In any calendar year, the Federal Government may spend no more than 15% of the GDP for the calendar year five years prior. The sole exception to this shall be in time of war declared by the Senate; in that case, the Federal Government may spend additional amounts but only for purposes of that declared war. The Federal Government is under no obligation to spend this amount. “Spend” shall not include payments on debt or in service of debt.
Duke of Sharon:
What a wonderful idea. However, first you’ll have to figure out how to do away with a Communist Dictatorship and then rewrite a new Constitution for the United States of America since the old one is dead.
Tough Work? You bet, but then we the American SHEEPLE are up to it right? We just have to wait until our next government check arrives before we get started.
Simply put, the deficit & debt are symptoms of a disease; the disease is government spending.
Let’s be candid. George W. Bush was no miser when it came to government spending, although President 0 makes him look like one.
Not only do Republicans need to switch the subject to spending, they need show real fiscal responsibility; they need to act to balance the budget, even if it takes a Constitutional amendment. They have a role model in Governor Christie in NJ (yes, NJ — whoda thunk!).
Conservatives, but not just Conservatives, are fed up with a Republican party that is a lite version of the Democrat party. Out with the RINOs!
Mr. Tweed,
I agree but the RINOs aren’t going to move out of party leadership until you and I move in. To most Conservatives I hear making your complaints I ask “did you go to your local party convention/caucus/primary?” If you’re like me, you hate party politics and 55% of the people you meat there you will find icky; but it’s got to be done.
So, you were out of the country during the Clinton administration? You are too young to remember the Kennedy administration, or have read about it in history books?
The chief tool of the “conservative revolution” has been to abuse tax dollars in grandiose spending schemes, usually that were unnecessary and unworkable. From Reagan’s science fiction space weapons program to Bush’s complete breakdown in monitoring contracts for mercenaries, we can see most of the budget abuses if we only focus on the crazy ideas of conservative Republicans. Democrats have been left to clean up the messes.