The Federal Government has a $16 trillion debt and it is still growing. If we don't get this problem under control soon (and I'm not hopeful that we will), we are heading for higher interest rates, lost jobs, diminished wealth and possible civil unrest.
Our government in Washington bailed out large banks and businesses that were "too big to fail". Who will bail out the government? For surely, we cannot allow an entity that has become so big that it's failure would be disastrous for each one of us. Perhaps we should consider that such a government is just too damn big.
The Constitution calls for a government that is limited with powers diffused not only by a system of checks and balances but also by its federalist nature. The advantage of such constraints are not only beneficial to a free society and effective governance but also to ameliorate damages possible by the failure of a single governing entity. For example, the effects of a single state going bankrupt are much less than that of a large unitary government.
As the old saying says: we have met the enemy and it is us. We must get our spending under control. To those who say that we must raise taxes to balance the budget, I would ask how high do they think taxes should be? My next question would be to ask if they understood how a free enterprise system really works? For it is not government spending that drives the economy but the diverse interaction of many in a free exchange of goods and services.
Cutting spending (and decreasing the size of government) makes sense not only in lowering the debt but in other ways as well. For example, it is often said in reference to federal laws and regulations that "one size does not fit all". We live in a diverse country with different cultures, economies, faiths etc.
A law that may be apropos for New York may not be for Montana. Federal programs (such as gun laws) may have public acceptance in some states but not in others. For these reasons, some issues may best be left to the states. An added benefit is that our national government can't seem to resolve them anyway.
Which leads to my final point. Why is the Federal Government so dysfunctional? We might be able to lessen this dysfunction by implementing various changes such as term limits, an amendment to require balanced budgets, tax code revisions etc. But assuming they would be enacted (unlikely) would their passage change anything? Would we still have an atmosphere of acrimony and distrust? And attitudes of disrespect if not outright disdain for the other side.
In the past, there have been sufficient reasons to struggle for important programs such as civil rights. There will continue to be important issues to face the Nation in the future. We need to get beyond those of the past and learn how to resolve the ones remaining and to come. If we can't trust one another and not respect other opinions, we are doomed to failure. For love of Country and our constitutional form of government, it is time for constructive debate and resolution of our problems.
Our government in Washington bailed out large banks and businesses that were "too big to fail". Who will bail out the government? For surely, we cannot allow an entity that has become so big that it's failure would be disastrous for each one of us. Perhaps we should consider that such a government is just too damn big.
The Constitution calls for a government that is limited with powers diffused not only by a system of checks and balances but also by its federalist nature. The advantage of such constraints are not only beneficial to a free society and effective governance but also to ameliorate damages possible by the failure of a single governing entity. For example, the effects of a single state going bankrupt are much less than that of a large unitary government.
As the old saying says: we have met the enemy and it is us. We must get our spending under control. To those who say that we must raise taxes to balance the budget, I would ask how high do they think taxes should be? My next question would be to ask if they understood how a free enterprise system really works? For it is not government spending that drives the economy but the diverse interaction of many in a free exchange of goods and services.
Cutting spending (and decreasing the size of government) makes sense not only in lowering the debt but in other ways as well. For example, it is often said in reference to federal laws and regulations that "one size does not fit all". We live in a diverse country with different cultures, economies, faiths etc.
A law that may be apropos for New York may not be for Montana. Federal programs (such as gun laws) may have public acceptance in some states but not in others. For these reasons, some issues may best be left to the states. An added benefit is that our national government can't seem to resolve them anyway.
Which leads to my final point. Why is the Federal Government so dysfunctional? We might be able to lessen this dysfunction by implementing various changes such as term limits, an amendment to require balanced budgets, tax code revisions etc. But assuming they would be enacted (unlikely) would their passage change anything? Would we still have an atmosphere of acrimony and distrust? And attitudes of disrespect if not outright disdain for the other side.
In the past, there have been sufficient reasons to struggle for important programs such as civil rights. There will continue to be important issues to face the Nation in the future. We need to get beyond those of the past and learn how to resolve the ones remaining and to come. If we can't trust one another and not respect other opinions, we are doomed to failure. For love of Country and our constitutional form of government, it is time for constructive debate and resolution of our problems.
I agree with everything you mention. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the American people have no clue of why government has become so dysfunctional. It's called leadership and leadership comes from the "top". Take a look at the last two eight year Presidencies: Clinton and republicans found ways to compromise. G.W. Bush and democrits found ways to compromise. Many of the same members of Congress from those years are still in office and yet no compromise. Does a community organizer learn how to compromise? The correct answer is NO as the organizer has nothing to "give". So while agreeing with Norm, I must agree with what he says in his second sentence. Why are our fellow citizens so divided? In my opinion, the democrit leadership has taken the approach of winning at any cost, aka; the end justifies the means mentality. In this, they seek power at any cost. They have won the elections, they have the power, yet could care less about our countries future, only what they "need" today. $16.6 Trillion in debt, the last $8 T accumulated from when the dems gained control of Congress in 07' until now. And to even state: we do not have a spending problem, speaks volumes about the current democritic leadership in Washington led by Barack Obama. Sorry Norm, but your last sentence calling for constructive debate, impossible with Barack Obama at the helm and Harry Reid leading the senate. I would recommend your readers google the sayings of Thomas Jefferson. Read them, and learn from them....Compare Jefferson's thoughts to those we hear in Obama speeches. Therein lies the problem......
ReplyDeleteNorm, I enjoyed this entry and the conceptual discussions or government size and states rights. I think we get too bogged down in an us vs. them mentality. Each party wants to stay in power. Each determines their best path to that end. In doing so, deals are made with each party's "friends", which are typically corporations and various industries. The end result is a diminished influence from the Middle Class of this great country.
ReplyDeleteI thought a bit about your comments on state's rights. I agree that different states have different needs. I wondered in this age of regular interstate travel, would an increase in varied laws between states create confusion amongst the citizens of the country.
I don't know if you read the recent TIME article about health care. I am just finishing it now, but it was an interesting read. The hospitals and pharma companies have become so powerful that their charges were never part of the debate, just who should pay for these costs. We bemoan the increase in the size of government, but if all people were covered under Medicare, costs would be reduced greatly. Granted, that would have a knock-on effect to the health care industry as their revenues would be slashed, but it shows the irrationality of pricing that those who can least afford it are asked to pay the most.
Anyway, there are multiple sides to any issue in this country. This focus on ideas instead of politicians will help lead us forward. I would like to see a more nimble, productive government too. With the understanding that every legislative "win" is a "loss" for the other side, you can see why as much is done as possible to limit the productivity of those in power. These politicians are so removed from their various electorates that accountability is minimal.
Good thoughts Ryan. Unfortunately, ideas becoming "reality" must be debated and passed into law by Congress. No getting around the elected leaders. A good source in which to "follow the money", is: opensecrets.org. I recall during the 2006 mid-term elections, hearing democrats claim the republicans were "bought" by special interest groups. I went to opensecrets and sure enough, the committee chairs received large sums of money from lobbyists and donors. After the election, the dems gained the majority and hence, chairmanship roles and a check back revealed, the money was again "flowing" from lobbyists and donors only this time to the dems in leadership positions. For the good of our country, we must somehow remove the power and influence money "buys"......For this, I have no answer yet until such happens, your good ideas and focus cannot happen......
DeleteKenny, I agree. I guess my point was that much time and energy amongst people like ourselves is spent debating the day-to-day actions or inactions of politicians. These discussions are distractions in many ways from bigger picture discussions. If we spend time discussing the problems with the health care system (for instance) independent of what any politician has said or did, change can be demanded by an informed electorate. We get too bogged down in anger with the president, the speaker, etc. The same general problems exist in this society no matter who is elected (as you say). Getting money out of elections is the first way to do that, but politicians don't want that.
DeleteThanks Ken and Ryan for your thoughtful comments.
ReplyDeleteI agree in general with your input. I don't have a ready answer for the influence of money on our legislative (and regulatory) processes. But it might not be so pervasive if Washington DC didn't have so much power. All the more reason to get DC out of areas they don't belong and which would be better handled by the states (or left to the people) just as the Constitution intended.
The point raised by Ryan that our country is becoming more interconnected and individual state laws may cause confusion may be true but the alternative of too much centralization and power in DC is much worse in my opinion.
There is the general issue about what kind of government we want and should have. We recently watched the movie (on demand) "Beasts of the Southern Wild" which to me is an allegory about freedom. My take from that excellent story is that most people just want to be left alone. And so it should be if that's what they elect and don't harm others in doing it. If one reads the sayings of Thomas Jefferson as Ken suggests (plus the Declaration of Independence), I think it's safe to conclude that he would agree with that sentiment.
In my opinion, we have drifted from our constitutional moorings. It's time we correct course if we are to keep our freedoms and avoid increasingly more oppressive government.
As always, I like to hear your comments and look forward to more of them.
Norm
Great website. A lot of useful info here. I'm sending it to a few pals ans also sharing in delicious. And of course, thank you in your effort!
ReplyDeleteMy weblog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al2XPf2DgwE
Fantastic items from you, man. I've take into account your stuff prior to and you're
ReplyDeletejust too fantastic. I really like what you've acquired here, really like what you are stating and the way wherein you assert it. You are making it entertaining and you continue to care for to stay it smart. I can't wait to read much more from you.
That is actually a wonderful web site.
My blog post ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCkK9-pzu_o
I used to be recommended this website by way of my cousin.
ReplyDeleteI'm now not sure whether or not this put up is written via him as no one else recognize such specific approximately my difficulty. You are wonderful! Thanks!
My web blog - how to make money from home online