Skip to comments.
A Deficit of Seriousness (Pols Spending Sprees Bring No Shame or Political Costs)
Newsweek May 16 issue ^
| 05/14/2005
| Robert J. Samuelson
Posted on 05/14/2005 4:19:46 PM PDT by drt1
No one in WashingtonRepublican or Democratis trying to balance the budget. Gone is shame about overspending or undertaxing. Every two years, the congressional budget Office publishes a fact-filled report entitled "Budget Options." This year's version is 343 pages, and flipping through it, you get a quick tour of the federal government's far-flung activities.
The Army Corps of Engineers spends about $800 million annually to maintain and improve the inland waterways, the Office of National Drug Control Policy buys about $100 million in anti-drug ads and the Department of Transportation provides about $100 million in subsidies for "essential" air service to small communities. The CBO surveys the federal landscape and, without taking any position, offers about 250 possible spending cuts or tax increases for those interested in balancing the budget. Among them:
Stop making grants to states to promote "safe and drug-free schools"a $1.6 billion savings over the years from 2006 to 2010; Raise the top two income-tax rates (now 33 percent and 35 percent) by 1 percentage point each$17 billion higher revenues over the five years; Impose user fees on meat and poultry producers to cover the costs of federal food-safety inspections$3.8 billion in extra revenues from 2006 to 2010.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: 109th; budget; buget; deficit; federalspending; govwatch; pork; spendin; wodlist
Unfortunately, he's mostly right. IMO we aren't taxed too little - The Gov't wastes too much and is involved in levels of economically inefficient Socialism that make a balanced budget an impossibility. I see no end in sight as long as voters reward Pols who bring home the Pork and as long as there is no Poltical price to waste, corruption and plain old mismanagement.
1
posted on
05/14/2005 4:19:47 PM PDT
by
drt1
To: drt1
The problem is the gov't can shift items on and off budget and that there is really no way that the gov't can accurately determine what it actually spends.
2
posted on
05/14/2005 4:23:42 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
(Rumsfeld for President - 2008)
To: drt1
Raise the top two income-tax rates (now 33 percent and 35 percent) by 1 percentage point each$17 billion higher revenues over the five years
*cough* Bu##sh!t *cough*
If that's the case, why don't we just jack the rate up to 50%, and that will erase the deficit, right CBO?
3
posted on
05/14/2005 4:28:49 PM PDT
by
A Balrog of Morgoth
(With fire, sword, and stinging whip I drive the Rats in terror before me.)
To: A Balrog of Morgoth
If that's the case, why don't we just jack the rate up to 50%, and that will erase the deficit, right CBO?"
Dont give the Liberals any ideas.
Kudlow has noted the supply-side tax cuts are working - tax revenues are 'higher than expected', since growth is doing well...
The deficit problem is over-spending. Keep spending increases to 0%.
4
posted on
05/14/2005 4:38:58 PM PDT
by
WOSG
(Liberating Iraq - http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com)
To: WOSG
Kudlow has noted the supply-side tax cuts are working
Don't they always? Heck, even the folks who design PC empirebuilding games tend to model the economy in such a way that you prosper in the long run by keeping taxes low.
5
posted on
05/14/2005 4:42:46 PM PDT
by
A Balrog of Morgoth
(With fire, sword, and stinging whip I drive the Rats in terror before me.)
To: A Balrog of Morgoth
That is the point isn't it? Everyone knows that roughly 30% plus of Gov't expenditures are waste, fraud and abuse yet instead of seriously attacking these bloated programs they mention it and go right on by to the old 'Revenue Increases' = Higher Taxes.
If the real costs of taxes were truly counted (Fed, State, Local, Excise, Inheritance, User Fess, etc, etc, etc) I strongly suspect the US would be a high tax country, contrary to what our leaders keep telling us. Typical Gov't reaction to any budget crunch.
6
posted on
05/14/2005 6:35:47 PM PDT
by
drt1
To: drt1
The reason neither party is trying to curtail spending is that most Americans have shown a disinterest in what politicians do. The government in Washington has realized that aside from a few, no one cares about the budget, the deficit or the national debtor. Among the masses there is no outcry.
In addition, Americans are numb to tax increases. How high can taxes go before there is a taxpayer revolt? Taxes increase in some way every day, sometimes double and triple taxes are assessed, and the sheep graze on.
Ask yourself, if you were put in charge of vast amounts of money, virtually accountable to no one, with no one paying any attention to how much you spend, and with unlimited resources coming in every day, would you be inclined to be prudent and cut your spending?
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson