The country is facing a 2009 federal deficit of $1.42 trillion, more than three times larger than any annual deficit in history. To get the country in the black for the year, every man, woman and child would each have to write out a check for $4,700. That’s a lot of money. According to the Government Accountability Office, 20 years from now, about 92 percent of every federal dollar will be spent on entitlement programs and interest payments on the federal debt. The federal government has only a few choices: increase revenue (raise taxes), reduce expenses (cut services) or a combination. And Congress is elected by a nation of voters who want to have it both ways: low taxes coupled with generous, federally funded programs. Yet we wonder why the national debt grows. So while the 2009 deficit is a stunning $1.42 trillion, the real question is whether it’s stunning enough to finally prompt Congress to make changes when the economy recovers. — Des Moines Register editorial
Remember Ross Perot? In 1992, he predicted that the federal budget deficit was on track to end the world as we knew it. In fact, the rapid growth of the economy during the following years reduced the deficit to zero. Deficits and debts mean just about nothing anyway — at least out of context. In 1945, the federal debt was 120 percent of the entire U.S. economy. A few years later, the debt as a proportion of GDP had been tamed — and not primarily because of cuts in government spending. Yes, of course — wartime spending ended. But the big change was in the denominator of the equation. Economic growth kicked in big time, and reduced the debt as a proportion of the economy to manageable levels. I’d prefer the government run a larger deficit. With unemployment and underemployment rising, the federal government has to spend more — and the deficit has to be larger — in order to get people back to work. — Robert Reich, RobertReich.blogspot.com
5 Comments
“To get the country in the black for the year, every man, woman and child would each have to write out a check for $4,700.”
Well, some are more able to pay than others. The bush tax cuts for the rich will expire in less than a year. It’s well past time to roll back the Reagan tax cuts as well.
Some say we are already seeing the effects of a declining dollar. Oil prices spiked two weeks ago and was not blamed on demand, but instead the value of the dollar.
I cannot live in debt. I know at some point someone is going to have to pay the bills.
I don’t think our government can work any differently, despite the opinion Robert Reich, author of “A call to arms for liberals and progressives against what Reich terms the “Radcons”, and a college professor at the seat of liberalism Berkley.
Combined Effect of Bush Cuts for 2003: Typical Families
(Amounts by which federal income taxes would rise if cuts are repealed)
Income Single Married Filing Joint
# of kids under 17–>
0 0 1 2 3
$10,000 $110 $76 $0 $0 $0
$15,000 350 142 610 661 661
$25,000 350 702 1,210 1,661 1,579
$35,000 350 932 1,433 1,897 2,245
$50,000 669 773 1,272 1,773 2,271
$75,000 1,318 1,714 1,817 1,938 2,437
$100,000 2,001 2,596 3,004 3,413 4,510
$125,000 2,695 3,277 3,435 4,094 4,571
$150,000 3,460 4,010 3,918 3,827 4,735
$200,000 5,218 5,623 5,531 4,918 4,364
$500,000 15,585 12,328 12,328 12,328 12,328
$1,000,000 37,713 38,426 38,426 38,426 38,426
Source: Tax Policy Center Table T03-0200
Food for thought:
Sue the state
Maybe Kansas public school districts are on to something after all. This idea of suing the state for what you want might catch on.
That is what some Kansas school districts did a few years back to capture more state dollars, and they are rallying the lawyers to go for it again. Thirty school districts – including Hutchinson USD 308 and some others in the area – belong to Schools for Fair Funding, which is building strength for another legal assault on the state.
Think it is strange that state agencies now are suing the state to increase their budgets? Nah, when you think about it, this fits right in with the way we operate in America these days.
Not only are we a litigious society, but in general – whether on talk radio or newspaper Web site comments – we prefer to fight for our own political position rather than try to see the other side’s perspective.
So, why not sue? Everyone should start doing this!
If the K-12 education system is going to sue, certainly the higher education system should not be left out. Board of Regents, you better get your lawyers ready, because the state is, after all, cutting your budget, too – by far more than K-12, in fact.
Never mind about the small matter of state government being in the direst financial straights probably since the Great Depression, apparently there is money for lawyers and lawsuits.
All state agencies need to be thinking about this. Everyone is getting cut, and it just isn’t fair. And, after all, this is about the kids – and the poor, the disabled, the elderly and … (insert unfairly treated interest group here).
So, the state’s welfare agency should sue. The Department of Aging should sue.
The prison system should sue to get its shuttered prison cells and boot camps reopened. The transportation department should sue for highways that aren’t being fixed – and our local government should join if our highway isn’t getting built.
The courts probably are going to have to start taking closure days because of budget cuts. They should sue. That would be interesting litigation.
Maybe we could shut down the Legislature and just have the courts sort out how much all the agencies should get. That would put legislators and lobbyists out of work. But, then, think of all the jobs for lawyers and judges.
And, just remember, it’s all in the name of fairness – fair funding, you know.
By John D. Montgomery/Hutchinson News editorial board
“Maybe we could shut down the Legislature and just have the courts sort out how much all the agencies should get.”
Happening all over America. That is why it is so important for progressive liberal judges to be appointed. Starts at the USSC.
In the education lawsuit taxpayers paid:
1. Local school property taxes used to sue the state.
2. Local school property taxes to defend the state.
3. State property taxes to defend the state.
4. State Attorney General’s bills for the legislation.
5. The judges salary to decide our fate
6. The Study which said to spend more on education.
In the end, neither the citizens, nor the legislature they voted in a democracy to represent them made the final decision. One man did. One judge.
One ring to rule them all~!!