Nothing to see here

It is unfortunate that our political leadership (on both sides) seems to have been a product of the US educational system, and thus are unable to perform simple mathematical calculations. I noted before that defense and discretionary spending could be entirely zeroed out, and we still would be spending more than we are taking in.

Clearly, we will need to raise taxes. But even more clearly, the spending rate needs to be cut far more drastically. The Senate has not managed to pass a budget in years, and the rest of the leadership is wholly feckless.

Here’s an idea: let’s start with the 2007 budget, balance it, and then let folks argue for their favorite interests starting from balance.

About thegameiam
I'm a network engineer, musician, and Orthodox Jew who opines on things which cross my path.

8 Responses to Nothing to see here

  1. Big Citizen says:

    Is it fair to damn them all to hell? There are a brave few who have stood up and staked their own careers on solutions to this crisis, would anyone care to listen.

  2. Elanit says:

    whoa what?? “clearly we will need to raise taxes.” seriously? you really wrote that? wow. i is impressed. does anyone else on the GOP side agree with that statement (ok, anyone with a vote and a voice that counts on the hill?), cuz i aint heard anyone yet.

    • Big Citizen says:

      Krauthammer, who you and everyone else ought to read regularly: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-the-super-committee-can-strike-a-grand-bargain/2011/08/04/gIQA9tJ7uI_story.html. No vote, but if his voice doesn’t count with those on our side of the hill, no one’s does.

  3. Elanit says:

    I appreciate you bringing this to my attention. I agree with this approach wholeheartedly (yes, I really do!). But why would the super committee get to an agreement on this when Boehner couldn’t get himself to agree with basically the same grand bargain he could have struck with the president just weeks ago, because he couldn’t get the votes? Is it because of the triggers?

    • Big Citizen says:

      Not sure I follow. I don’t think anything like this was on the table between Boehner and the President weeks ago.

      In any case, I think the main advantage to what Krauthammer is proposing is that it would advance in stages. Build a foundation of actual reform, trust, and credibility on which to base further debate and reform.

  4. Elanit says:

    I dont have time to do the research now, but from the reading I did during the debt ceiling debate, this was exactly what the president and boehner were talking about. wholesale tax reform and a huge reduction in spending.

    regardless, i’m not sure i can be as optimistic as your last line. i just don’t see any desire by the majority of folks on the hill to build any trust between the parties and do anything that would make the other “look good”. i truly wish that i’m wrong, though, and that the leaders will put reasonable members of their parties on this committee and prove the whole country wrong in the process.

    • Big Citizen says:

      This may interest you: http://keithhennessey.com/2011/07/12/left-of-bowles-simpson. Worth noting that many Republicans, even conservatives like Coburn, supported this even though it included a net tax increase.

  5. Linda Tirado says:

    I love it. We should start our own bipartisan budget committee. We could call it the Un-Supers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: