If We Cut The Budget, There Will Be No Police, Parks, Teachers, Traffic Enforcement, Schools, Life On Earth As We Know It, Etc.

People opposed to cutting government spending always threaten that if the cuts are made, very visible necessities will abruptly disappear. It’s an argument that goes on all the time all over the country. No one every says, “If we cut spending, five employees whose jobs overlap with five other employees will be terminated.” Well, it is the silly season in Washington, and the truth is on vacation.

Byron York at the Daily Caller posted an article yesterday pointing out that our budget problems have to do with spending–not entitlements.

The article points out:

There’s no doubt federal spending has exploded in recent years. In fiscal 2007, the last year before things went haywire, the government took in $2.568 trillion in revenues and spent $2.728 trillion, for a deficit of $160 billion. In 2011, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates, the government will take in $2.230 trillion and spend $3.629 trillion, for a deficit of $1.399 trillion.

Mr. York concludes:

The bottom line is that with baby boomers aging, entitlements will one day be a major budget problem. But today’s deficit crisis is not one of entitlements. It was created by out-of-control spending on everything other than entitlements. The recent debt-ceiling agreement is supposed to put the brakes on that kind of spending, but leaders have so far been maddeningly vague on how they’ll do it.

This issue could be an important one in the coming presidential race. Should Republicans base their platform on entitlement reform, or should they focus on the here and now — specifically, on undoing the damage done by Obama and his Democratic allies? In coming months, the answer will likely become clear: entitlements someday, but first things first.

There will be an increase in government expenditures as the baby boomers retire. Restructuring Social Security is probably a good idea–but it has to be done in a way that keeps faith with the people who have paid into the program all of their working lives. Social Security should never be ‘means tested’–that would make it another welfare program. The people who paid into it should receive benefits from it. Remember that those who may be financially well off probably paid more into Social Security than those who made less during their lifetimes. Therefore, to ‘means test’ the program would simply make it a wealth redistribution program–not what it was originally intended to be. A large part of the problem with Social Security is the fact that Congress has spent all of the money. There is a part of me that wants to force Congress to reimburse the Social Security fund with their retirement money. It seems only fair.


Enhanced by Zemanta

5 thoughts on “If We Cut The Budget, There Will Be No Police, Parks, Teachers, Traffic Enforcement, Schools, Life On Earth As We Know It, Etc.

  1. Hello there, just become aware of your weblog thru Google, and found that it is really informative. I’m gonna watch out for brussels. I’ll be grateful for those who continue this in future. Lots of folks will probably be benefited out of your writing. Cheers!

  2. You have written a extremely thought-provoking article. Your content speaks to me and I share within your views. numerous writers do not compose genuine material, but you have actually done an ideal profession with this information.

Comments are closed.