PEACE ON EARTH

GOODWILL TOWARD ALL MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN, BORN AND UNBORN

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

A fork in the Road

And for my Free Lunch

Thank you very much Peterson-Pew folks.
The concluding remarks at the Peterson-Pew Commission on the Budget was the luncheon keynote speaker stating "There is no such thing as a free lunch" which of course compelled me to give at least some journalist time on this blog to pay for my chicken entree because they didn't sell tickets -it was free. The whole room was watching for free as far as I could tell, and now you can too here, on C-Span. Please do- it will tell you a few things you need to know now.
http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2010/02/16/HP/R/29614/PetersonPew+Commission+on+Budget+Reform.aspx

I am tempted to sit at the computer and watch all four hours of it again to see if they got my good side but that would be far too narcisistic! If you know me, please don't write and tell me I need a better hair dye job because I already know.

I will later synopsize some of it here- but it is worth watching all the C-Span coverage.
Basically the take away is - we are in trouble people, and we are at a significant cross-road. The public debt to GDP ratio is in trouble, we need solid fiscal goals, a sound fiscal policy and a grip. What we have instead is a messy way democracy tries to reconcile bills that don't emminate necessarily from a coherent fiscal policy and congress is too beholden to special interests demanding entitlements without a full appreciation of the whole budgetary picture. You can't keep spending what you don't have. Our deficit is Carazy People. Just listen to these guys.

Bush spent money like a dry drunken sailor- blowing the surplus Clinton had hard fought with hard choices (thank you John Podesta) outdoing even Lyndon Johnson's spending.

We are in two 'undeclared' wars we can't afford and there is little let up in sight.

We need economic attainable sustainability and all those fun buzz words.
Monetary policy is intricately linked to fiscal policy and a crisis is not all behind us potentially.
What it really means is that, in old fashioned terms, we can't spend more than we make, take in less revenue than we budget out - and lets not forget how much in hock we are to foreign investors who either have us by our collective cahoonas or are terrified of what our tanking currency might do to their investments and balance of trade, depending on who you talk to. We are not out of the woods yet-stimuli notwithstanding.

Health care (how we fund, finance and pay for health) is a major issue, with John Podesta thinking it may very well bankrupt the country if we can't get a handle on it and more Republican sounding speakers thinking that it is only a piece of the hysteria and all the Senate/House bills on the subject so far only make it worse.

It went on for 4 hours so I can't do it justice here- really, just watch it yourself. Grab a pot of tea and watch the whole thing (or grab a Guiness -it's Mardi Gras-but then give up alcohol for lent because we all need to get a grip now.)

Bottom line- it's either political suicide or not to advocate for increased taxes for everyone, because how else are we going to pay for digging ourselves out of debt (Value Added Tax on certain goods -the V.A.T-was proposed as was a carbon tax). 'Read my lipstick' seems to sell better than send more money into uncle Sam for entitlements for everyone else. Sharing is caring and the country is veering toward a more european appetite for social programs while not sharing the european appetite for taxation. That doesn't sound like a winning recipe for a campaign pledge.

Bottom Bottom line: No one will bail us out. Crysler, AIG, Citibank and Greece may get a bailout. No one is bailing the US out. We all need to get ourselves a serious grip now.

The panelists framed the issue, clarified the problem, projected potential doom and gloom if the tide is not reversed and offered a few solutions, while clearly leaving room for rethinking more of it. How do you invest in R&D and Infastructure, for example, when arguing in cutting back entitlements and federal spending at the same time?

Where Intelligent Minds Go: http://budgetreform.org/

No comments: