Posted on 11/15/2010 6:43:27 PM PST by jazusamo
Another deficit reduction commission has now made its recommendations. My own recommendation for dealing with deficits would include stopping the appointment of deficit reduction commissions.
It is not the amount of money that these commissions cost that is the issue. It is the escape hatch that they provide for big-spending politicians.
Do you go ahead and spend the rent money and the food money-- and then ask somebody else to tell you how to escape the consequences?
If President Obama or the Congress were serious about keeping the deficit down, they could have had this commission's recommendations before they spent hundreds of billions of dollars, handing out goodies hither and yon to their pet constituencies.
I don't know why people agree to serve on these bipartisan commissions, which save the political hides of the big spenders after they have run up huge deficits. Back in the 1950s, there was a saying: "If you didn't invite me to the take-off, don't invite me to the crash landing."
Deficit commissions make it politically possible to spend money first and get somebody else to recommend raising taxes later. They are a virtual guarantee of never-ending increases in both spending and taxes.
Why provide political cover? Leave the big spenders out there naked in front of the voters! Either the elected officials will change their ways or the voters can change the officials they elect.
There is no special information or wisdom available to unelected deficit commissions that is not available to elected officials. Nor are they more far-seeing than politicians.
Cutting defense spending to save money? That is one of the oldest moves in the liberal play book. Some soldiers may pay with their lives for this, but that could be years from now-- and after the next election, which is as far...
(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...
That's a keeper.
I think we should start lobbying ALL of the Congressional Repubs to ELIMINATE the Nautional Education Assocation. Take the money and divert it to the states in a declining fashion for 10 years to eventually ELIMINATE IT as a budget line item.
Here is what that does:
1. It returns proper power to the state.
2. It temporarily protects some of the teaching jobs at the state level.
3. It sets up a WAR between the Unions, the Democrat party and the American people who would WANT the money sent back the states.
4. It sets up a WAR between the Demo-fascists, the Federal Unions and the LOCAL teachers unions as well!
What a great way to stop the TRASH that should have NEVER happened at the fedral level.
Sowell makes valid points, but the unfortunate reality is that without political cover, making progress on the deficit is impossible. That’s just how our system works now.
Okay, okay, a few typos. I guess I should check my typing more carefully before posting... ;)
Really appreciate the ping to the wisdom of a man in full ... and sadly, so few pay attention to his wise offerings. Would it be too much that God help US bring men like Dr. Sowell into leadership roles that effect legislation?
Not to mention the fact that I think you’re talking about the Cabinet-level Department of Education, and not the National Education Association, which is a teachers’ union. Though it is worthy of elimination, too, it is not something that can be done in the budgeting process.
Want to bet the commission does NOT recommend the single biggest item, to reduce costs and deficits?
Drastically cut headcounts, pay rates, benefits and pensions for all government employees.
City, boards, counties, states an d feds.
Police, firemen, teachers, alongside every other category.
If only there were enough people with the wisdom of Dr. Sowell who would be willing to enter politics our country would be much the better for it.
No bets with me and they’ll never recommend it.
Yeah, Right, Spare us those commissions LOL. Thanks for the ping jaz.
One thing I disagree with - there is plenty of waste and fraud in the defense budget just as there is in every other government agency and program. Why should Lockheed Martin, for example, get big bucks for selling our government crappy products?
I believe you make a valid point but I don’t believe Dr. Sowell is referring to companies, Congressmen and Senators abusing defense spending for their personal gain.
He is addressing the overall cutting back on defense spending that puts our nation and the lives of our military in jeopardy years down the road should confrontations break out when we are not prepared for those confrontations.
The number one responsibility of our federal government is the protection of our country and its citizens and they have to budget for that.
We should get rid of that waste and use the $ to buy F-22’s.
thanks jaz...
“The number one responsibility of our federal government is the protection of our country and its citizens and they have to budget for that.”
But they do a terrible job of it, so that eventually people will start to ask exactly what government is for.
I have no expectations that the crooks we have in power will do anything other than enrich themselves at our expense. I don’t know what the answer is, but the current system is broken.
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.