The journey from there to here

A few weeks ago, this thought came to me:

We've lived too long under the government we deserve. It's time to give ourselves the government our GRANDCHILDREN deserve!

You see, for too many years, we have operated our government on the "play now, pay later" principle. Debt has seldom been taken seriously, as we feel that we can simply repay the money we're borrowing at some esoteric later time.

But it doesn't take a great economist's mind to see the flaw in this. If our government is living every year on borrowed money, eventually our debts will catch up to us. In common terms, if you have a $45,000/year salary, you can only live on a $50,000/year budget for so long.

So much talk is spent on the environment and preserving it for future generations. We talk about leaving estates and trust funds for our children as well. But we remain remarkably silent when we are talking about the ultimate trust fund, our federal government.

On the road to a fiscal balance, we ultimately have two choices: either raise our taxes to cover all of the programs we insist on having, or reduce spending to less than what is brought in. The former course may sound the more appealing, but who should we raise taxes on? Many will argue that they could fairly be raised on the wealthy, and indeed it's hard to feel too much sympathy for a guy with a $5 million yacht, but one must remember the jobs that guy with the $5 million yacht often provides.

It is no credit to be conservative with one's own money. We have self interest guiding our buying principles. When we are conservative with others' money, then we can consider ourselves to be good stewards. And our legislators and leaders are stewards of a public trust, and as such, conservators of the money of others. As such, they owe it to their constituents to lead with sound economic principles, and to provide accountability for the money that is spent.

My generation, the generation known as X, has inherited the debt of generations before us. But it is time to echo the words of former President Harry S. Truman in saying, "the buck stops HERE!" We cannot resurrect the dead; we cannot rectify the mistakes of the past. But we should not continue to make those mistakes into the future. We owe it to our grandchildren, and to our grandchildren's grandchildren, to NOT leave them saddled with enormous debt from our financial recklessness. It is time, no, PAST time, to give them the government they deserve!


Comments
on Oct 21, 2007

Hmmm, I argued not long back that perhaps we should be thinking about raising gasoline taxes to help pay for roads and people complained that we're taxed too much and the government wastes too much money.

I still say it's some of both, but that we need to bring in money for the needs and stop paying for many of the wants.

Roads and infrastructure are needs.  Spending on many social programs are wants.  I'm sorry to have to say it, but much like the fuss about SCHIP expansion, we spend too much providing social welfare to people that don't really need it.  We pay billions to farmers via subsidies that go to companies like ADM rather than to individual farmers.  Yeah, that's brilliant. (NOT!)

I don't mind paying as I go, but in order to do so, I want to know that the government isn't wasting the money it takes from me.  I want to pay for needs, not wants.

on Oct 21, 2007
I still say it's some of both, but that we need to bring in money for the needs and stop paying for many of the wants.


No, what we need to do, terp, is pare down the pork and use the money to pay for what's needed. You get no argument from me on things like road maintenance, the argument comes when new taxes are suggested to pay for it. We don't need new taxes. We need more efficiency from the taxes we're already paying.

How many billions of dollars, for instance, have been spent investigating and prosecuting families who are provably innocent of child abuse/neglect? How much needless money has been spent by the National Endowment for the Arts and other pork projects? Giving the government more money when they're already operating with such appalling inefficiency would, in my opinion, be a mistake.

In my perfect world, you'd GET your road money. But out of the more than $10,000 per man, woman and child in the United States that we're ALREADY paying, not out of additional revenue.
on Oct 22, 2007

I still say it's some of both, but that we need to bring in money for the needs and stop paying for many of the wants.

I think Gid's analogy of the $45/50k situation is a good one.  It is a rare person who can arbitrarily give themselves a raise (outside of the beltway) to accomodate their perceived need for a better life style.  Truth be told, while the government has that capability, there seems to be no end to their appetite, so when taxes are raised, it is not to pay for the debt or the needs, but for more pork that does nothing for the problem Gideon raised.

You dont cure an alcholic by raising their booze quota, and you cannot cure the government by saying "raise taxes for this need".  It never works.  They still waste too much on the wants.  No, it is time that they got serious about cutting (not reducing the rate of growth of) spending.

While I support the idea, I am too cynical to believe it will happen.