Thank God They Saved the Expensive Safety Nets!
By: Guest Authors
By: Dr. Phil Taverna
The budget fight has been very revealing. It proved a lot of assumptions that have been made before. By now most people have weighed in but is this budget fight a good thing or a bad thing? And was it really all about ideology focusing on abortion?
Women were all over NY TV condemning a cut in the budget because it would cause the death of women. If Planned Parenthood was defunded it would be an end to free medical care to all women. Thatâ€™s a lot of crap. But the vitriol was endless. One Democrat claimed that the last congress didnâ€™t have time to vote on a budget. Thatâ€™s right they were too busy making backroom deals. They were trying to pass a bogus bill entitled Obamacare. But they did have plenty of time to screw up the economy and spend and spend!
Another jerk said there was no compromise because the Democrats wanted no cuts and the Republicans wanted 100% of cuts to the tune of about $100 billion American dollars. So donâ€™t forget to hold the Democratsâ€™ feet to the fire in 2012. Tell them we were in a recession and you wanted no cuts in the 2011 budget!
So do you get the picture? Basically the year is getting close to half over and the United States of America did not have a budget yet! Another Democrat stated that the budget is only a guideline. So maybe after that comment the law should be that a debt ceiling be in place, and all spending must never go over that budget ceiling amount.
Another quick thought: Have you ever had a congress that adjusted the budget a year later if they over spent or under supplied with tax revenue. Not on your life! They donâ€™t care if there is a deficit. They just add it to the national debt deficit when nobody is looking!
Enough of that garbage for now! Letâ€™s take a little spin as to why we always need to spend and spend. There was a radio guy that wanted to piss off his audience so he made this profound statement. It was simple. If you only make minimum wage, you shouldnâ€™t be allowed to have children. Translated means if you canâ€™t afford to have children then you shouldnâ€™t have them. All of a sudden people can control whether they have children or not. 58 million abortions and counting if only they could speak would tell you something different.
But the point is that the liberals always talk about a safety net. They are the guardians of the safety net. And for the most part a great deal of the spending and fraud mushrooms as we try to come up with this all encompassing safety net.
We have so many safety nets in this country that we have safety nets that have safety nets.
But that is where we all have a problem. Obviously when we fall on bad or hard times itâ€™s nice as well as American to know that you and your family will not be starving and freezing out in the cold on some corner or boardwalk in Atlantic City.
All you have to do is march down and demand from the government office all kinds of goodies. You can get food, shelter, healthcare, tuition and money with little or no effort. And if you really know how to play the system, you can get more money and benefits than you could possibly need.
And that is fine and dandy when you are down on your luck. But what about the folks who are always down on their luck and they decide that the best way to live is to always be on the dole.
So in essence there is no one in the country no matter what Queen Pelosi says that canâ€™t afford to have children! Thatâ€™s pretty cool, right? If you canâ€™t get a job to afford children, then all you have to do is have your generous government pay for all of them!
The real question or should we say the clarifying question most Americans should ask: Is liberal and Democrat spending good for the country?
We need to break that down a bit. Is the glorious safety net too expensive for America and will it limit our future prosperity?
What about the debt ceiling? The down to the wire sham held by our politicians will result in raising the debt ceiling. Do you have any idea what that really means. Doesnâ€™t it mean that Congress and the liberal president are given Carte Blanche to spend more money? If they spent more money in proportion to the increases in revenues collected then that would not increase the debt ceiling. So what the liberals have agreed to do with the Republicans is to raise the debt ceiling. That means they have giving themselves permission to continue to out spend the revenue!
They donâ€™t get it. There should be an amendment passed that unless the government has the revenue, they canâ€™t spend it! And unless the people hold the liberalsâ€™ feet to the fire, they will continue business as usual and spend way more then they take in.
Is there any reason why they cannot adjust the budget as per vectors or monthly numbers that hold the budget monthly expenditures to a fixed amount? Of course this must be adjusted accordingly because there are months like April, January, July, October where the government collects more money than months like February, March, May, June, August, September and November . So a rolling range/average should be created of 3-4 months and the government spending must stay within that average. If the government did that, then the budget would not be a guideline like Charlie said, but would be a hard fast document with a ceiling that would be unbreakable even for the likes of Hillary and Soros.
In other words if the monthly budget (amount of tax revenue collected) for July calls for $890 billion American dollars and the monthly budget was allotted for $1.1 trillion, then immediate and automatic cuts or adjustments would be made to bring the monthly budget in line. For example if there were a trillion dollars of Pork Barrel spending planned for that month, it would be immediately cut by $210 billion.
If we had a plan in place that was this disciplined, there would never be any spending that would increase the national debt deficit. And for the first time in history or for a very long time the real debt would actually go down. We donâ€™t need a debt ceiling and we donâ€™t need a make believe budget. We only need to know what the monthly revenues are so that they can be allotted for the necessary expenditures. Pretty simple isnâ€™t it. Why didnâ€™t congress come up with such a simple plan?
If they had read the constitution, they would know! There is nothing wrong with a safety net as long as it is there for emergencies only. And there is never any good reason to have a chronic safety net that out spends your revenue! Chronic safety nets never add anything to the pot containing the revenues!