<< Back to all Blogs
Login or Create your own free blog
Home > What Part Of This Do We Not Understand?

What Part Of This Do We Not Understand?

September 17th, 2008 at 05:58 am

I read http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/09/news/economy/cbo_budget_upda... recently on CNN.com.

I am reminded yet again of why I am on this crusade.

In the United States, we are being taxed at the highest levels ever YET the government (people that WE elect) are spending it even faster.

Guess what? Whether you are dealing with four dollars, four million dollars, or four trillion dollars the fact remains that INCOME - OUTGO = EXACTLY ZERO.

Why don't we have a balanced budget that also has debt reduction in it?

I thought about this question for a few minutes, and here are some reasons I believe we do not have a balanced budget.

* It is hard to tell ourselves "No."
* It is even harder to tell others "No." Especially people we care about.
* There are a lot of good causes out there, and we want to fund all of them.
* Elected officials who cut spending for their district run a high risk of being run out of office.
* The "I'm going to put America on a budget." campaign speech is about as appealing as the spouse who announces "We're going on a budget." Instead of thinking "financial freedom" (that's what I think of when I hear the word "budget"), most people think "NO!", "No Fun!", and "Boring" and believe that it will be incredibly restricting, constricting, and beans & rice all of the time.
* Many people do not typically think toward the future. It takes time, effort, and organization to think about the future implications of such financial management. Many Americans are hugely short of time, effort, and organization.

What are you thoughts?

3 Responses to “What Part Of This Do We Not Understand?”

  1. gamecock43 Says:

    Financial freedom (budget)...I like that connotation. From now on I am going to start telling my fiance we are working on our financial freedom whenever he wants to spend. He might respond better to that than budget. Thanks!
    ~ and I would vote for someone who made saving a priority...but think about it. You are only in office a few years...a few years of drastic saving will do NOTHING for the national debt...so all your hard work will be overlooked and discounted. People will clamor for a president who 'does something.' Savving money is very quiet. Theres no show regarding saving money. Not like a war. Now theres a show.

  2. sillyoleme Says:

    I agree that it might be more difficult for a candidate to run on a platform that includes major budgeting and spending cutbacks. It seems that everyone wants to yell about the deficit, but nobody wants to pay more taxes or have programs cut.

    Gamecock: You're right, a president is only in office for a maximum of 8 years... hard to get any significant work done probably. BUT - elected Representatives and Senators could be involved for much longer. Unfortunately, the group of them is scrutinized very little for their roles in government spending.

  3. disneysteve Says:

    "In the United States, we are being taxed at the highest levels ever"

    Where did you possibly get that idea? Current tax rates are at historic LOWS, not highs. In the 1940s and 50s, the top marginal tax rate approached 90%. All through the 70s and early 80s, it was 70%. It now stands at 35%, one of the lowest rates ever.

Leave a Reply

(Note: If you were logged in, we could automatically fill in these fields for you.)
Will not be published.

* Please spell out the number 4.  [ Why? ]

vB Code: You can use these tags: [b] [i] [u] [url] [email]