One of the consistent media talking points is that the nation “should not have to go through this again,” meaning the debate over raising the debt ceiling.
I could not disagree more, and look forward to going through this — or something like this — when the “super committee” makes its recommendations (assuming the deal goes through), when we argue over the expiration of the Bush tax cuts as part of the presidential campaign, and all next year. This has been one of the most informative and nationally enlightening debates we’ve had.
People have become educated as to the dangers of deficits and the debt.
By all means, we should have to go through this again, soon.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The “debt deal” did not cut any spending. It merely decreased the increase.
We will have to go through this again, and again, until the government no longer spends more than it takes, and until it pays off the outstanding debt — and unfunded liabilities which loom even larger.
Why not just raise the debt ceiling to, oh, 100 trillion dollars, and then we won’t have to worry about it again until Congress spends it all, 2015 at the latest.
I fully agree with this point, and then some. 🙂
I agree and remember thinking just a few days ago that this fight was not a bad thing ….which surprised me for a brief moment until it hit me I had bought into the media talking points
I can’t believe I’m agreeing with Warren Buffet, but I saw a quote from him the other day in which he proposed that any year that the national debt exceeds the GDP by more then 3%, those in office become ineligible for re-election.
Too bad they don’t mean we should not have to go through this again because we won’t go over budget again. But, they want to avoid this one small symptom of a fatal disease.
I’m with you, until a cure of the disease is begun, we need this symptom again and again and again.
The “debt deal” did not cut any spending. It merely decreased the increase.
Exactly, and to me that means it’s not even minimally acceptable. To me an acceptable compromise would be to cut spending by $1. This doesn’t even do that.
[…] also find myself in concord with Professor Jacobson whose short post on the topic is included here in its entirety,: One of the consistent media […]
We are still learning government-speak about “baseline funding,” or “baseline budgeting.” Paul Ryan’s visit on Hannity tonight points that out. One order of business now is to get rid of that slight-of-hand that makes it so easy for politicians to have more money to spend.
Throughout this all-consuming, nation-wide, to-the-bitter-end debt ceiling cap debate, the President and Congress were too busy to pass any expensive, deficit-boosting, social-engineering legislation.
We should do these monthly.
The politicians must have this debate every 6 months. If that happened, we would not be in this mess caused by career politicians. If the taxpayers saw this every 6 months, there would be career politicians’ blood in the streets after 12 months.
This a huge win for Obama’s re-election chances.
Towson Lawyer: Would love to see the debate in public.