Apparently the "people's" administration has announced a fourth $400+ Billion dollar spending bill in the past 6 months (and second in two months). This one is to make up for spending cuts made by the Bush administration. Two questions:
#1. If George W. Bush grew the size and scope of government more than any president in history, then how can it be necessary to pass $410 Billion in new spending to make up for his budget cuts?
#2. Barack Obama announced this weekend that he wants the deficit cut in half by the end of the first term. So far, the government has passed (and now announced) about $2.5 Trillion in "stimulus" spending. He inherited a $1+ Trillion dollar deficit. He has cut taxes on "working families" and non-working families just so long as they don't make a lot of money. If he's honest, he might push a budget with a $3 trillion budget deficit this year. If Bush was such a terrible fiscal president (which history will agree) who was once completely inept for passing a $300 billion budget deficit, then how is Barack Obama not the worst for having a lofty goal of a $1.5 TRILLION deficit before his term in office is over?
I don't doubt that he will cut the deficit in half before the end of his first term. The question is whether it is the $500 Billion final Bush budget deficit or his soon-to-be $3 trillion budget deficit? The former is a VERY lofty goal that we should praise him for (especially if it doesn't mean he's taking over 50% of my paycheck to do it). The latter is more likely, and also unfortunate that he feels it's an accomplishment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
not to be a grammar nazi, but in the last sentence you wanted "latter" not "ladder"
Thanks lowlow. I always run the spell check but sometimes don't reread to make sure I used the right word.
Post a Comment