Don Boudreaux sums up perfectly why the budget compromise that was reached late last week is a joke:
Suppose that in a mere three years your family’s spending – spending, mind you, not income – jumps from $80,000 to $101,600. You’re now understandably worried about the debt you’re piling up as a result of this 27 percent hike in spending.
So mom and dad, with much drama and angst and finger-pointing about each other’s irresponsibility and insensitivity, stage marathon sessions of dinner-table talks to solve the problem. They finally agree to reduce the family’s annual spending from $101,600 to $100,584.
For this 1 percent cut in their spending, mom and dad congratulate each other. And to emphasize that this spending cut shows that they are responsible stewards of the family’s assets, they approvingly quote Sen. Harry Reid, who was party to similar negotiations that concluded last night on Capitol Hill – negotiations in which Congress agreed to cut 1 percent from a budget that rose 27 percent in just the past three years. Said Sen. Reid: “Both sides have had to make tough choices. But tough choices is what this job’s all about.”
What a joke.
Which reminds me of what H.L. Mencken observed about the primary talent of successful politicians:
“Their power to impress and enchant the intellectually underprivileged.”
When you consider that the “U.S. Tops China, Britain, France And Russia Combined.. U.S. Spending Up 81% In Past Decade — military spending, not spending for education, healthcare, infrastructure repair, or to give SS recipients a modest increase in benefits, it’s easy to how our national priorities have become hostage to the special interest groups in the military/security complex both here at home and in that “special” country over there which President Carter correctly characterized as one whose major domestic policy is apartheid.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/10/global-military-spending-_n_847257.html
“The public always prefers nonsense to sense”.
HL Mencken
tom,
mr. mencken was half wrong–i have known many intellectually “privileged” who prefer “nonsense”.
example: some people with a good IQ, knowing health care is 20% of budget, as is social security and defense, will constantly carp for more and more for the first two (not clearly a function of government in the first place) and whine and moan about national defense (the ONE, clear function of government).
the shame of it is that such nonsense-preferring folks obscure good points they might make in a cloud of rantings that undermine their credibility and fail to advance the conversation.
The largest part of the “defense” budget is for OFFENSE, not defense – which IS a function of government.
Social Security is funded by a payroll tax. It isn’t something Congress votes on in a national budget.
“i have known many intellectually “privileged” who prefer “nonsense”. Yes, obviously you do.