The Democratic Party’s rhetoric during the upcoming shutdown is that it was caused by extremist republicans.
Robert James Bidinotto explains at Big Government what is really happening. His story goes roughly something like this.
Let’s suppose you are your spouse are bringing in about $2,170,000 a year. That’s absolutely wonderful, and you should have plenty of money with vast sums left over for savings. However, you and your spouse have spend so much that you’re borrowing $1,400,000, along with promises you’ve made to others that you would need over $60,000,000 today to honor.
Now, you decide it’s time to get tough and tighten the belt, so you propose cutting $100,000 from the budget. Even after the cuts, you’d still be spending $1,300,000 more than you have, and you’d still have massive unfunded liabilities.
Your spouse, however, is unwavering and refuses to compromise. After haggling, the argument comes to whether to cut $60,000 or $33,000. Your spouse still won’t compromise and come to a mid-way point even with these modest and, honestly, useless cuts.
The democrats label the one spouse who wanted to cut $100,000 an extremist. Even after that spouse has negotiated to $60,000, they are still called extremist.
Folks, the sad fact of the matter is that the federal government is so broke it isn’t funny. It’s so bad that we don’t even talk about the true balance sheet of government in polite company, and when people do see the numbers it seems like a fairy tale. Unfortunately, it is absolutely true.
An extreme cut would be reducing the federal budget to only $100 billion a year. That’s right, getting rid of everything except a few very essential things. Such cuts would mean the military would all have to come home, and we’d have to carefully invest the precious capital we have.
Cutting the budget by so that it balances, a cut of $1.4 trillion, is not extreme. It is common sense. Anything less is idiotic.
Reforming the entitlement programs so that we don’t have $60 trillion in unfunded liabilities is not extreme. It is common sense. Anything less is idiotic. If you expect to collect a dime on the entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, you would be screaming for entitlement reform, the same way a bank trying to collect on a loan demands that the family has at least enough income and a sane enough debt to income ratio to support house payments before writing the loan.
The coming government shutdown on Monday will likely result in spending we still can’t afford, even with the reduced services. When you think about that, it boggles the mind.
The only extremists in this debate are those who argue we shouldn’t cut the budget down to balance it this year. That’s right, Paul Ryan’s “extreme” budget is only extreme because it continues to grow government at 2.8% each year and doesn’t cut nearly enough.
Addendum 1: The left side of the country is screaming that we need to raise tax rates on the rich to balance the budget. They imagine that there are enough millionaires and billionaires in this country that you can simply tax your way to prosperity. I don’t have to reiterate why raising tax rates doesn’t necessarily increase tax revenue. You can ask one Professor Laffer, and you can also ask the State of New York how their millionaire tax went. Those who refuse to admit these facts are either too dim to understand the basic concepts of economic reality, or are driven to tax the rich to extinction. Either way, this is not a sound way to balance the budget and ensure a prosperous future.
Addendum 2: Even thought Paul Ryan’s budget doesn’t actually cut anything, but instead grows government at a “modest” 2.8% a year, it may actually, in the long run, lead to a balanced budget and a comparatively smaller government. Paul Ryan’s hope is that the economy grows at faster than 2.8% a year, and as such, the tax burden on the American people could go down. This is only slightly less insane than the Democrat’s proposal because if we get hit with an economic downturn as we did in 2008, then his whole plan goes to ruin just like what happened in 2008. I would rather tighten the belt today, and let the future take care of the future, rather than counting on the future to bail us out today.