Inspired by the August 11, 2008 edition of Time Magazine.
Consumer confidence is at an all-time low, and many Americans are struggling to avert foreclosure as they pay $4 a gallon for gasoline. The economy has become center stage in this election. With the budget deficit next fiscal year (starts in October) estimated to be $482 billion, where do the candidates stand?
On July 7, John McCain promised to balance the federal budget, sort of. His plan is to achieve balance by cutting spending, but he is fixated on cutting earmarks, which would only net about $20 million per year.
On July 28, Barack Obama held an economic summit with his advisors. Obama isn’t even pretending to balance the budget. His claim to pay for the things he proposes rests on controversial issues like raising taxes and closing corporate loopholes.
Our government, Republicans and Democrats, while both had control of the presidency and congress, have let our infrastructure languish for 20 years. We need new pipes, wires, asphalt, bridges, power plants, and radar. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates that we’re going to have to spend $1.6 trillion over the next 5-10 years.
McCain has acknowledged some of these issues, especially energy policy, but he does not seem to have a comprehensive strategy. McCain does support a cap-and-trade program to limit carbon emissions, even though this is considered a carbon “tax” by many. McCain was also opposed to the farm bill (which Obama supported) demonstrating a commitment to free trade. As far as other infrastructure improvements, McCain has not provided a vision.
Obama’s reliance on government sponsored solutions has risk as this philosophy has proven to be less efficient than the market in figuring out the most effective new technologies. A long term program at $21 billion per year for the next ten years would help improve infrastructure, has limited inflationary risk (assuming the Iraq war $10 billion per year cost can be reduced), and would provide limited jobs and infrastructure improvements.
In the end, as a nation, we are going to have to get back to fiscal responsibility if we are to keep our great country moving forward.
7 comments:
This is a financial mess for which both
Republicans and Democrats must take the
blame. Hopefully, the new President (whoever
that turns out to be) will put the nations best
minds to work to figure out the solution. God
help us either way. Pat
I think we're on the verge of needing something similar to Roosevelt's New Deal. A massive refurbishing of our infrastructure might be part of the solution (it needs to be done anyway) and building sources of alternative energy might help, too.
Beth
We are in a mess, & I am not blaming the little guy, but we ALL need to take control of our own personal finances as well. I no longer have conversations with some people in my area who constantly complain about what the economy has done to them, because some of these people did not tighten their belts before this was happening, even though they had very little money & were in debt then. They didn't conserve their cash WHILE this was happening either, & now listening to someone in the line buying a $4 coffee(which I buy also, but I don't complain when I don't have money, I just don't make purchases. that is part of the reason I have money now, & not ALL of the reason I know. i've made good investments at times were I could have been spending more on me.) saying the govt got them into this trouble leaves me cold. ~Mary
What Pat said (#1).
Joyce
It's a mistake to look to government to fix the economy. If the government could control it, there would never be a recession as all of the wealthy elite in Washington have investments that depend on it. It's an even bigger mistake to "vote with yourwallet". Many vote that way, rather than what's best for the country. In a society where no one is responsible for their actions, we MUST be responsible for our own actions as Mary said below.
To get back to fiscal responsibility would mean eliminating the special interest pork-barrel spending. There is more waste in government than anyone realizes. McCain is more on track with this than tax-and-spend Obama. The reason we realized benefit from President Reagan's plan was that he not only reduced the budget, but that's something that doesn't affect us much. He did something I had been saying since I was in my early teens - cut the spending! The reason budget cuts don't work so well is that it only reduces the amount of growth in spending, but it still grows. This is because of the type of budgeting the Federal government uses. Making cuts on the other end, SPENDING cuts, are where we all benefit. Just cutting the waste alone would greatly reduce Federal spending.
Dirk
good job Bucko... taxpayers are still led to wonder
natalie
Bucko
on second reading of this entry
I think that he should get our experts(you included) to get reimbursed and sent to counsel with the big wigs about these matters.
Mark twain and Ben Franklin would take a dim view of our reliance on "the Man" to solve our problems. they were aware that it took many peole to resolve these planning issues and even brainstorm for ideas.
Having said that, what do you think now?
hugs,nat
Post a Comment