Friday, April 15, 2011

A real budget for a real America

Did you see the President on Wednesday?  You may not have recognized him because he's been in hiding for quite some time, letting Republicans dominate the airwaves with their silliness, but I guess he was just resting up because on Wednesday he came out swinging and man did he look good!

Before I get into how Obama made Paul Ryan look silly, I'd like to turn your attention west, to Britain.  As you may remember, Britain imposed harsh austerity measures a year ago, planning on turning around their economy and reducing their deficit.  Take a look at Britain today and see how that's working out.  The layoff of more that 300,000 government employees due to cuts may very well lead the country back into recession.  That's not a foregone conclusion, but it's always sadly amusing to hear Republicans say they're concerned with creating jobs when their policies will cost thousands of jobs.  For the economy to grow there needs to be demand and unemployed people don't spend their paychecks. Obviously there has to be a balance between public and private employees (and by balance I mean there need to be FAR more private sector employees than public employees), but nonetheless, public employees are spending those paychecks and creating demand.  Republicans seem to either forget that or just simply not care.

Anyhow, back to Obama's budget plan.  I want to start with a bit of criticism.  I've been hearing a lot of this lately: "we've got to live within our means."  Let's talk leadership for a second.  Leadership requires vision and President Obama certainly delivered plenty of that in his speech, but Russia is planning a lunar base as a stepping stone to putting a man on Mars.  If any country beats the United States to putting a man on Mars it would be a national travesty and an embarrassment.  Let's stop pretending like America is a decrepit nation on the way out and that we have to cut back on our greatness to reflect our position as an impoverished nation that must live within its means.  This is America, we've got problems and we're going to fix them because that's what we do in America.

But about those problems, the deficit specifically, the President did not disappoint. Rather than offering a vision of America in which we're too poor to provide basic services (although still somehow rich enough to give money to rich people), the president outlined a much better path.

Among the cuts he mentioned - and he was far too vague - were many that I and a multitude of others have mentioned in the past.  He began by talking about cutting defense spending.  The need for cuts in defense spending is paramount. We can assure America's safety and still spend less and more wisely on defense.  How's this for hypocrisy - CBO analysis has shown that the $38 billion in cuts passed recently really only amounts to about $350 million.  Why? Because they were offset by increased military spending.  Keep that in mind next time you go to the polls.

The president then went on to address healthcare spending, the main driver of federal spending and debt. Let's make this clear for anyone who may not understand the difference between Obamacare and Paul-Ryan-no-care. Skyrocketing health costs are the main driver of federal debt.  The Paul Ryan plan for fixing rising health costs is to ignore them and slash spending by refusing to pay for Medicare, instead offering vouchers to help subsidize costs.  All this does is shift the cost to people; it makes Americans shoulder the burden. In no way whatsoever does it even attempt to control rising costs.  Obamacare (I'm staring to love the term) is an attempt to spread the burden by requiring that everyone have insurance so that my taxes don't pay for your healthcare.  It focuses on cheaply preventing diseases rather than expensively treating them. It's not a perfect bill, but it attempts to address the problem and preserve benefits for Americans rather than running from the problems while leaving Americans with less.

Finally, Obama mentioned the politically incorrect, but the fiscally responsible step that has to be taken, raising taxes.  In Paul Ryan fairly tale land we can make $4.3 trillion in cuts, but also cut $4.2 trillion in revenue and close the deficit. In Paul Ryan fairy tale land, vampires and werewolves are friends, but everyone knows that in real life vampires and werewolves are locked in an ancient, unending war, so we know Paul Ryan's budget is loony. In reality, we will have to raise taxes.  This year I paid the federal government $400 and GE paid the federal government $0.  Aside from being grossly unfair, is that kind of revenue really going to fix our deficit?  Is cutting revenue further going to make it better.

There are obviously other areas that need to be addressed to truly make the government efficient and yet still allow it to provide the services that Americans want.  But if we want to ensure the greatness of our country we have to do so with sensible cuts that  maintain a view of America's future greatness and the well-being of all Americans.  We cannot afford a budget that cuts everything including revenue and benefits only the wealthy.  Exit Paul Ryan, enter Barack Obama, a man with a real budget for a real America.

3 comments:

  1. This is the fourth time i've attempted to leave a comment and it's been lost in cyberspace so please accept the shortened version of my original comment -

    i also like Obama's speech. i thought he showed the courage and conviction that his supporters have been missing for sometime now. Hearing things like "not on my watch", filled me both with a sense of nostalgia for the inspiring speeches of Obama's presidential campaign and pride in his passion, which i haven't necessarily seen a lot of lately, for this great country. i hope the speech wasn't a strategic move or a deliberate performance meant to display the rhetoric that America wants to hear. Obama ran on a platform of compromise, understanding, bipartisanship, and levelheadedness. The people loved that attitude, especially after Dubya and the republican-dominated congress which preceded 2008.

    But just as with the bully on the playground, sometimes reason accomplishes nothing. Considering the shameless attitude of the G"no"P and all the compromising Obama has already agreed to, this is the case now. I'm not the only American who wants to see Obama draw a line in the frigin sand and fight. After all, obama's plan for the budget is more balanced and altogether better than Ryan's. That's partly because Ryan's plan is a fantasy and so ill-conceived, i'm rather amazed at the support for it. The president seems to grasp the importance and necessity of being firm in this instance. He seems to have found his sack. And it's a big, and it's black and it's got a vision for prosperity and success in this great country!

    i can only find one point of disagreement throughout your post - the bit about living within our means. I think you're somewhat loading a simple phrase. It doesn't imply that we are weak or that we're reducing our greatness by living within our means. To have a balanced budget, rich or poor, everyone must "live within their means". It's only a matter of input vs. output. It would be outside of my means to go buy a new car. It may be unwise for Bill Gates to buy a new country. It doesn't imply anything about status, abillity, or wealth. THE reason for the federal deficit and a major reason for the collapse of the financial system is the unwillingness for Americans to live within their means. Houses too big and SUV's in the driveway, all bought on credit. The same goes for federal spending, albeit the comparison involves different dynamics. i would also be upset if China or Russia beat us to a technological landmark. But on the other hand, it's really a pride thing - keeping up with the Jones's. We are fighting 3 wars, own the world's largest debt and have endless social issues which require funding. Mars is far away. Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think that you are right about what the quote "live within our means" should mean, and I like your interpretation of it.

    Having said that, you want Obama to draw a line in the sand and fight for important issues and so do I. Too often "live within our means," becomes almost a phrase of concession and, if anything, future political ammo for Republicans...Obama doesn't think we're a great country.

    America SHOULD spend wisely, but every time I hear "live within our means" it comes out in this sad, depressing tone that makes it seem like America's glory days are over. So what it SHOULD mean and what it comes out as are different. It should mean a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage, instead it sounds like roadkill and a used bicycle.

    All I'm getting at is that America can be great - and we are at our greatest - when we spend wisely and still dream big. Too often lately it seems like we're spending unwisely and have given up on dreaming altogether...except Republicans, they're still dreaming of the 1950s.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah i know what you mean now. Last night I heard Donald Trump criticizing Obama's speech for that very reason, among others. Essentially he said that living within our means is a concession to socialism an act of surrender to obama's failed economic policy. A dream lost. As ridiculous as this assertion seems to you and I, it's probably hitting home for the conservative base. Obama is crushing our dreams by trying to force us to live within our means and make the country socialist. The President will probably have to re-phrase his message or just come up with some other means of conveying it using more sensational or vague language. Reality isn't much fun for a lot of people, especially the tea party. But it's true, Obama does have to choose his words carefully with the public already talking about 2012 and the looming fact that the words he chooses can blow up in the media and cause amazing damage to public perception.

    ReplyDelete