Steve
Enjoying life!
I've read two news articles today that talk ominously about the deficit and both candidates' plans for spending over the next four years. Both were on MSNBC but there is no real need to link them. They gave the usual spin expected for the candidates.
What struck me about both articles is the overuse of statements like "[some cut] will cost the government 1 trillion dollars". They say this like it is a bad thing, as if a tax or programmatic cut is a personal affront to the government. Dems target Bush for promoting discretionary spending limits, knock him for cutting taxes, then charge he is increasing the deficit. Excuse me, but when did any money automatically become the government's anyway, as if the government were some individual (i.e. King) that we all tithe to?
I understand the OMB, GAO, taxes, spending on programs, etc., so don't yammer at me about the budgetary process, "tax-and-spend", etc. I'm talking about the fundamental principal that what we earn should remain ours except for that which is needed to protect the nation as defined in the Constitution.
When a candidate proposes cutting programs to lower the deficit, or cut taxes to put more money in workers' pockets, it's always portrayed as "costing" the government. Meanwhile, the citizens of the government must live within their reasonable means or go bankrupt.
Seems to me we let the servant act the master for too long now. And it bugs me that people don't get this concept on the left side of the fence. JMTC...
What struck me about both articles is the overuse of statements like "[some cut] will cost the government 1 trillion dollars". They say this like it is a bad thing, as if a tax or programmatic cut is a personal affront to the government. Dems target Bush for promoting discretionary spending limits, knock him for cutting taxes, then charge he is increasing the deficit. Excuse me, but when did any money automatically become the government's anyway, as if the government were some individual (i.e. King) that we all tithe to?
I understand the OMB, GAO, taxes, spending on programs, etc., so don't yammer at me about the budgetary process, "tax-and-spend", etc. I'm talking about the fundamental principal that what we earn should remain ours except for that which is needed to protect the nation as defined in the Constitution.
When a candidate proposes cutting programs to lower the deficit, or cut taxes to put more money in workers' pockets, it's always portrayed as "costing" the government. Meanwhile, the citizens of the government must live within their reasonable means or go bankrupt.
Seems to me we let the servant act the master for too long now. And it bugs me that people don't get this concept on the left side of the fence. JMTC...
