That’s just flat out wrong. The government takes FROM the economy. It can’t spend without taxing or borrowing. Cut the government spending, cut the taxes, cut the borrowing and watch the economy soar!
The first problem is that there are significant consequences to acting rashly. That's true with the Obama sequester, that's true with a brick-wall Balanced Budget Act. The biggest problem is we have a huge number of unemployed people; a brick-wall balanced budget amendment will just increase the number of out-of-work people significantly. The Gross Domestic Product will also sink in the short term, which can well throw us into a deeper Depression than we currently face, not to mention rivaling the Depression of the 20s and 30s.
So, Job One is to turn around the shrinkage in employment. We need more people gainfully working, contributing taxes, and not contributing to the drain on the public treasury. The best way to do this is to reduce the job-killing regulations foisted on us by the Executive Branch.
Does Obama really want to save the environment on the backs of the poor and unemployed? That's what he is doing. He can rail all he wants about "those bad, mean, rich people" but he owns the continuing unemployment trend -- it is his Administration that is making it difficult to do business in the United States. His regulations are driving up costs, driving down return on investment, and causing otherwise sensible people to look elsewhere for skilled labor. Like China.
Instead of proposing changes that would encourage people to "do the right thing", Obama is trying to use the point of a gun to achieve his goals of leveling the classes. I've mentioned previously how he could propose a change to the tax code to encourage employers to profit-share with the employees. I have also proposed tax code changes to do something about the income imbalance problem that doesn't increase the power of the government on its citizens. Obama doesn't like the idea of providing choice, and letting market forces determine what happens to people making those choices.
Once the economy start increasing the number of employed people, and reducing the number of unemployed and underemployed people, then you can start in on dismantling the unconstitutional programs the Federal government runs today. Those who can produce can then join the private sector, making goods and services that can be sold here, and more importantly exported to other countries to reduce the imbalance of our trade accounts. Those who cannot produce can move to State government and do the same things they do today, but at a more appropriate level.
Unfortunately, there is inertia in the economy. A gentle push over time is more effective than a cannon-ball strike to get things moving in the right direction.
You then start in on the indirect expenses of government. Simplification of the Code of Federal Regulations. Congress helps here by simplifying the US Code -- starting with Title 26, the Tax Code. Reduce the number of laws so that the GOOD laws stand out.
You don't like what I'm saying. Let me put it this way: the economy is not ready to soar the way you would like. Like an airplane, the economy can only climb so fast without causing a crash. Not only do we need to reduce the Federal payroll (including contractors) but we need to have the economy ready to absorb the workers displaced by such a reduction in force.
One of the forces hurting the economy is the lack of producers and the growth of bean-counters, especially bean-counters who are rewarded hugely for creating bubbles. Case in point: banks Too Big To Fail. That cost the taxpayers a very pretty penny...but nothing really has been done to prevent another bubble from bursting to the point that we have to fork over cash again.
We also have a lamentable lack of accountability. You may think that Elizabeth Warren is the spawn of the Devil, but I think she's right on when she asks the question, "how many Wall Street banks have you brought to trial for crimes?" Ours is a country based on law, not on men. At least that's what I was taught in eighth-grade Civic class. Yet here we have people making decisions that make or ruin lives, some of those decisions extra-legal, and yet they never see a day of prison time. The mortgage auto-signing: who went to jail for that fraud? The little woman at the bottom of the pyramid scheme. A "conspiracy of one". Right.
Bottom line, I'm all in favor of a balanced budget, including paying down our debt. I'm just not for going over the cliff to do it. Get people back on the private-sector payrolls before doing anything else. Get charity out of the hands of gun-pointing government and back in the hands of the people. Shift safety nets back to the States and Counties and Cities and towns, where the people have a better chance of tailoring the cushions to the needs of the less fortunate in their neighborhood.
A good, steady, march. It took us years and years to get here. The cure will take time, too. I agree, we have to start NOW.
A balanced budget now would send a message that America has an ecomomic future and would revitalize our economy in the long run.
The continuing process of “sequester crisis” after “crisis” to force little “cuts” and little tax increases is the process of a slow economic death.