For Those In Favor Of A “Balanced Approach”

How many times has federal spending ever declined?

…why exactly would anyone expect Congress to really cut spending down the road if it has shown essentially no ability to rein in spending in the near term? This is like a variation on the old joke about losing money on every unit sold but making it up in volume. Except it’s not like that at all. Or funny.

No, but it is business as usual. Until the economy implodes.

4 thoughts on “For Those In Favor Of A “Balanced Approach””

  1. How about McConnell and Boehner start by asking the Dems to give a list of things they will cut?

    They’ve told us clearly what taxes they want to raise.

    1. Getting out of Afghanistan would be a start but I doubt it will happen any time soon.
      Someone needs to whack the people working on the Ground Combat Vehicle in the head. They are seemingly proposing an 84 ton IFV.
      I would cut the corn ethanol farming subsidies but seemingly those already expired last year. I would also lower the import tariff on sugar. Government sponsorship of biofuels is a waste of time as the unconventional oil reserves in North America are coming online.
      There will probably be a push for more centralized government services as a cost cutting measure.
      What will Obama do? Probably more of the same he already did on his last mandate.

      Things where money should be spent include the Ohio SSBN replacement. I would probably also spend some dough upgrading Trident at the same time. If the Army wants heavy IFVs it is probably going to be cheaper to convert some Abrams tanks to IFVs like the Israelis have done to their Merkavas. At the same time a new MBT should be developed to replace the Abrams. With modern optics the tank crew can have 360 degrees view all around the vehicle and have more automated target recognition and selection. There are better suspensions available so tanks can be faster than the Abrams. With a V-12 diesel powerpack the tank would have less fuel consumption and more range with less logistics involved. That would prepare the US for a possible nuclear engagement and/or a land war in Asia.

    2. Obama and the Dems have already agreed to $1T in sequester cuts — they’re the law. What tax rate hikes have the Republicans agreed to?

  2. Until the economy implodes

    The US economy has imploded quite a few times before, but never because of overspending.

Comments are closed.