Friday, July 15, 2011

The Absurdity Of A Balanced Budget Amendment

I'm so glad you asked.
    If you're anything like me, you're tired of Speaker Boehner's picture clogging up your twitter feed linking you to the same thing every three to ten minutes. You could see this and reply but, it's not like he's(by 'he' I mean  his staffer in charge of his tweets) is going to read it. So chances are, the only people who read your reply would be your 30 followers. I decided to go a completely different route, mostly because I still have trouble with the 140 characters or less thing, and reply here completely aware that there's even less of a chance someone would bring it to the speaker's attention. (I'm honest.) The URL in the tweet redirects to a blog post on the Speaker's website posted by Micheal Ricci which can be viewed here.


    Those of us who don't know the wording in which the purposed Balanced Budget Amendment contains, probably look at the name and think "what idiots would be opposed to a balanced budget!? Loony Libs!" So allow me to give you a little run down in the simplest terms possible. It would lead to an atmosphere where the middle class and the poor would suffer the most while the rich (excuse me, job creators) will most likely have to pull none of their weight. It would require massive cuts to helpful programs while making it harder to raise taxes but easier to lower them. Which isn't even good for business for in the long run because people would eventually be too broke to buy their products. But it's purely politics, it's all smoke and mirrors for the most part. Even top conservative economists like Norman Ornsein know that what they are purposing is utter garbage. 

"It is about the most irresponsible action imaginable...It would virtually ensure that an economic downturn would end up as a deep depression, by erasing any real ability of the government to pursue countercyclical fiscal policies and in fact demanding the opposite, at the worst possible time." - Norman Ornsien
  For the good of the country, we have to raise taxes (or at least close a lot of the loopholes). We can't continue to go on with this nonsensical notion that if the rich have less taxes it will create jobs. We need to make serious investments in our future, and we can't do that if we only focus on cutting programs that help the less fortunate who done nothing wrong, while rewarding those who caused this economic disaster in the first place with more money. A Balanced Budget Amendment would only rely on spending cuts to balance the budget. There would be no other option seeing as it would take a substantially large amount of congress to approve raising taxes to the minority with the majority of political influence. Then again you could always "eat your peas" America, if you can afford them.

No comments:

Post a Comment