If only all journalists in the United States had as much integrity and courage as Cal Thomas does to write what is overwhelmingly obvious and write it with so much clarity. Take, for example, government spending, why it has become so bloated and what effect such spending has on you and I, the American taxpayers.
Cal's latest column is about overspending by governments: Federal, State and Local. And he explains clearly why such overspending occurred and what the (mostly Democrat) elected leaders in these governments want to do by way of a "solution."
From his column:
| Democratic governors from overspending states like New York, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Ohio are among those seeking financial deliverance. The governors want Washington to pony up $1 trillion for their absolutely-essential-non-negotiable-if-we-don't-get-the-money-people-will-starve programs. |
But why should we, the taxpayers, fund this bailout? Who among us would not be held responsible, as individual citizens, for spending more than we take in?
Read on:
| New York Governor David Paterson claims that, because tax revenues have plunged, 43 states now have budget deficits totaling around $100 billion. No, those states have deficits because when times were good and the money was rolling in they thought they could get away with endless new programs, while putting little or no money aside for the inevitable rainy day. Neither did they consider which programs were necessary and which ones were just politically beneficial. Or, maybe they did and they opted for politically beneficial, thus creating their problem, and ours. Notice the sleight of hand about to be perpetrated on hardworking taxpayers. In the end, it is we who pay for the plans of politicians who are unable, or unwilling, to control themselves when it comes to other peoples' money. When Republicans cut taxes, Democrats scream about growing deficits. But Democrats never worry about the deficit when they spend more than what the government takes in. So it really isn't about the deficit at all. It is about how much of our hard-earned money the Democrats, mostly, will allow us to keep. |
Bingo! Look at that simplicity of comparison. Conservatives cut taxes and the libs complain about not enough money to spend. Libs spend more money than they have and then delude themselves into believing that our grand-children will be happy to pay for the libs non-sense appropriations. What would happen to you if you ran your household budget like this? You would, at the very least, recieve a very low credit rating and not be able to get new loans, or at worst, go to jail.
And what is even better is that the comparison between the libs and Conservatives is valid and absolutely true.
More:
| The incoming Obama administration wants to spend gobs of money on "infrastructure," creating government jobs that will end when the work is completed. Isn't infrastructure primarily supposed to be the work of state and local governments? Isn't the gasoline tax supposed to go to build and repair local roads and bridges? The federal responsibility should begin and end with the interstate highway system. The governors' request for more money from Washington is also about unfunded mandates, the rising cost of Medicare and Medicaid and a lot of other "entitlement" programs that could have been made solvent during the Bush administration, which tried, but was unable to succeed due to opposition from Democrats who preferred to have an issue rather than a solution. |
And there is the reason the Dems don't want any real solutions to the overspending problem. They need wasteful programs in order to buy votes and they need a way to keep people dependent on the government for their livelihood.
This is a most excellent column and everyone should read it:
Pigs At The Trough
Cal Thomas
TownHall.com
January 6, 2009
No comments:
Post a Comment