SEE YOUR ECONOMIC COLLAPSE
AND RAISE YOU NATIONAL DEMISE
By: Selwyn Duke
Being just weeks away from
reaching our debt ceiling and with frightening talk about a fiscal cliff, theres
much sympathy in Washington for tax increases. Even conservatives are wavering. A few
Republicans have dumped their anti-tax pledges, and former Nixon official-turned-actor Ben
Stein favors taxing the wealthy. He says that we cant cut our way to a balanced
budget and insists that the revenue end must be addressed. But I have news for him:
hell have a better chance finding
Ferris Bueller on his day off than fiscal sanity through tax increases.
get real. Federal revenue this year will be approximately $2.5 trillion.
much, again? Well, updating some examples Rob Bluey provided at The Foundry lends the following perspective:
is 2,500 billion
million per year, LeBron James would need to work 54, 607.5 years to earn it
life in the U.S. lasts 2.4 billion seconds
billion seconds ago = 1933
trillion seconds ago = 74,250 BC
a stack of 2.5 trillion dollar bills would reach a height of 169, 665 miles more
than two thirds the way to the moon. This brings us to the second part of the problem.
set to spend this year $3,500,000,000,000.
up, that many bills reach to the moon. And
thats where were headed fiscally.
the moon, Alice.
lets get back to calls for more revenue. Imagine you had a teenager to whom you gave
$1000 a month, and he not only squandered it every time but also continually maxed out his
credit cards. Would your solution be to give him even more money and/or secure him a
credit-line increase? Or might you, outraged, cut up the credit cards and tell him he must
live within his means? (In reality, you should cut him off completely.)
may seem a ridiculous example, giving a teenager one grand a month. But is it any more
ridiculous than giving the feds 208,000,000,000 a month and then entertaining the notion
that they should perhaps get even more? Bueller? Bueller?
if the government cannot get by on $2.5 trillion a year, guess what!
it up root and branch and start anew.
Root and branch.
note that the government did get by on $2.5 trillion as recently as 2005; thus, a balanced
budget could be achieved simply by resurrecting the spending levels of 7 years ago. And if
we returned to the 2004 budget, wed run a surplus exceeding $200 billion with
itll never happen.
of the reason why brings us back to Steins belief that we cant cut our way to
a balanced budget. Hes actually correct given the feds definition of a
cut. Im referring to Washingtons accounting trick known as
baseline budgeting, a process by which the government labels any proposal to
reduce the rate of spending growth of an already inflated budget projection a cut.
Citizens Against Government Waste explains
the warped thinking:
[I]f an agency's budget is
projected to grow by $100 million, but only grows by $75 million, according to baseline
budgeting, that agency sustained a $25 million cut. That is analogous to a person who
expects to gain 100 pounds only gaining 75 pounds, and taking credit for losing 25 pounds.
liberal politicians were truly serious about fiscal restraint, theyd eliminate this
sleight of hand. But they wont because theyre not. Ronald Reagan learned this
the hard way in the 1980s when he agreed to a budget deal that included three dollars in
spending cuts for every dollar in tax increases. The taxes came first.
cuts never came at all.
Reagan later wrote, The Democrats reneged on their pledge and we never got those
heres a message for Republicans who think that liberals can be negotiated with on
the budget. Ill be blunt.
idiots, THEYRE NOT GOING TO STOP SPENDING. CAPICHE?
Yes, I screamed that. How do
I know they wont stop? Ooh, maybe because they havent stopped for 50 years?
Maybe because the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior? Its also
because a liberal is a liberal is a liberal. A scorpion stings, a cuttlefish expels ink, a
skunk sprays mercaptan fluid, and a liberal spends. Its what the species does.
conservatives dont grasp this, however. They make a common mistake: they assume
others think as they do. Theyre largely rational, so they expect rational behavior
from their fellow man. But as I explained
recently, emotion prevails in peoples decision-making far more than you may
think. What feels right often trumps what is right even when its downright stupid.
as with an old friend of my fathers whom Ill call Sal. Sal had a gambling
problem and spent and spent and borrowed and borrowed until he could borrow and spend no
more. Bankruptcy finally cured him. And such is the fate of the soon-to-be
late, great United States. The dependency class will go over the cliff grasping at their
freebies, and the politicians will take us over the cliff dispensing them. Hey, a
civilizations gotta die a somethin, right?
is one reason Im adamantly opposed to tax increases. Like the reckless teenager or
Sal, the federal beast will simply consume whatever ventures near its insatiable maw and
then some. So my message would be: get by on what you have or to Hades with you. Go
over that cliff. Because like any addict, you cant help yourself. And better it
happens sooner, while Americans still have a bit more change in their pockets (for
whatever its worth), than after theyre further impoverished in the name of
balancing the budget.
whats the end game? First, our more than $16 trillion national debt increases by an average of $3.87
billion per day and amounts to $52,000 for every man, woman, and child. This will never be
I do see one way out of our debt hole. When the profligates in government (and their
sheeple voters) finally collapse the system, there wont even be a common federal
feeding trough to hold our culturally, ethnically, and ideologically balkanized land
together. We then may dissolve as the Soviet Union did, with various states, or blocks of
them, going their separate ways. And guess whod be left holding the bag? Note: the
$16 trillion we owe is federal debt, not
state. And Id just say, hey, Washington, D.C., you know that debt thing? Good luck
with all that.
course, the Chinese would end up getting stiffed. But they only pony up the dough because
they have a symbiotic relationship with us: they keep us afloat so we can buy their goods.
Besides, anyone foolish enough to lend money to our government gets no sympathy from me.
The only question is whether well be foolish enough to believe that throwing good
taxes after bad will change bad spenders into good shepherds.
"Published originally at EtherZone.com :
republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
Duke is a writer, columnist and public speaker whose work has been published widely online
and in print, on both the local and national levels. He has been featured on the Rush
Limbaugh Show and has been a regular guest on the award-winning Michael Savage Show. His
work has appeared in Pat Buchanan's magazine The American Conservative and he writes
regularly for The New American and Christian Music Perspective. He is a regular
contributor to Ether Zone.
Selwyn Duke can be reached at: SelwynDuke@optonline.net
the December 9, 2012 issue of
Copyright © 1997 - 2012 Ether Zone.
We invite your
comments on this article in our forum!