Well, I don’t know about anybody else. All I know is that I belong to no organized political party. I’m a registered Republican.
Nevertheless, I have deduced at least one thing out of this entire mess regarding ObamaCare. I’ll take it as long as we balance the federal budget this year, and for the 29 years thereafter.
In fact, if we balance the national budget for the next 30 years, then who would care if the Socialists / Democrats / Progressives / Liberals want a program to send federal agents onto the streets to throw $100 bills at homeless people? We can only hope that Congress, as our only organized criminal class capable of buying support this way, wouldn’t vote for that kind of nonsense; but it’s likely no one ever lost money underestimating their intelligence.
Of course, I wouldn’t support such legislation. However, I, for one, would accept the concept of free money to the homeless knowing that balanced budgets for the next 30 years would eliminate our $17 trillion debt and that there wouldn’t be another debt ceiling vote in Congress.
Unfortunately, the reality is that, during the most recent five years, our federal government has collected only $2.2 trillion annually, while spending $3.6 trillion annually. The resulting regular occurrence of a $1.4 trillion deficit has taken a manageable $10 trillion national debt five years ago to one that portends immediate bankruptcy today if our creditors conclude that American wealth won’t soon catch up to the printing presses at the Mint.
In case you haven’t received the memo, that is about what this government shutdown and big partisan debate is.
The coincidence that our national government annually spends on social entitlement welfare programs almost exactly what it collects yearly from all sources leads to a simple perspective: We borrow every discretionary dollar that we spend.
From this point of view, the solution to balancing the budget through spending reductions seems clearly to lie on a line segment defined by the following two endpoints:
- cut $1.4 trillion (64%) out of all ($2.2 trillion) non-discretionary funding
- cut all ($1.4 trillion) discretionary funding
Most of us might be happy with almost anything in between.
For those who believe that we can squeeze more out of those undeservedly rich, greedy bastards without them continuing to insist on more access, influence, and attention to their interests by government in exchange, psychological counseling (now ‘free’ under ObamaCare) might be in order. On the other hand, we could broaden the tax base, simplify the Tax Code, and attempt to raise additional, significant (relative to our annual deficits), revenues from more Americans, on top of what ObamaCare will now collect from us.