This page was last updated on August 8, 2011.
Look in the mirror; Editorial; Beaver County Times; August 7, 2011. At the time I wrote this critique, this editorial appeared only in the print edition of the BCT.
Below is a critique of the subject editorial.
“When it comes to debt, Americans aren’t much better than the federal government.
“The same goes for being fat and bloated (if you buy that argument about the federal budget).
“While many Americans seem to be appalled by the amount of debt the federal government has been piling up, they’ve been doing a pretty good job of digging themselves deeper and deeper into debt.
“Americans’ combined debt is around $13.4 billion not much less than the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling which just got raised.”
[RWC] “$13.4 billion [is] not much less than the $14.3 trillion?” Since “$13.4 billion” is 99.9% less than “$14.3 trillion,” I assume this is yet another BCT proofreading error. According to US Debt Clock.org, total personal debt is a little over $16 trillion (as of 8/8/11), not “$13.4 billion.” Of that $16 trillion, about $13.6 trillion (85%) is mortgage debt. I’m not much into taking on personal debt, but mortgage debt is secured, unlike government debt. I wonder why the editorial failed to mention both the composition of the personal debt and how it differs from that of the government.
“Another parallel is taking place as well.
“To hear the right-wing media and political talk, the federal government is fat and bloated. (Never mind that’s far from reality; the right isn’t particularly interested in reality-based reality.)”
[RWC] Sure. The BCT has been peddling this position since at least May 2011.
I’ll go out on a limb and guess the BCT definition of “fat and bloated” means the military paying too much for a toilet seat. My definition also includes government doing things it has no business doing, like Medicaid, Medicare, Socialist Security, et cetera.
“But while these Americans want their government to slim down, they’re not so exacting when it comes to personal standards. Two-thirds of all Americans are now classified as obese or overweight, even though they’ve been told the costs associated with those conditions - mainly high blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease - are driving healthcare through the roof.
“But instead of doing what needs to be done, which is to exercise more and eat less (and more nutritionally), they opt for quick fixes - crash diets, pills, quack remedies, etc. - that quickly fizzle out, leaving them fat and out of shape.”
[RWC] Were it not for the government sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong via Medicaid, Medicare, tax provisions, etc., none of this would have any effect on government finances.
“They’ve applied the same quick-fix mentality toward restoring some sense of fiscal discipline to the federal budget.”
[RWC] If you’re aware of the BCT editorial body of work, you know it has no credibility on this topic. According to my records, no BCT editorials even mentioned the “cut, cap, and balance” bill (H.R. 2560) passed by the House.
“Instead of making the hard choices that are necessary for the long-term health of the government and the nation - reducing spending and increasing revenue to pay down the debt – they’ve opted for more quack cures such as a balanced-budget amendment, term limits and minor cuts in spending.”
[RWC] “[H]ard choices” is leftyspeak for increasing both tax rates and spending.
If “a balanced-budget amendment” (BBA) is a “quack cure,” what was Pay-go? You may recall the BCT referred to Pay-go as a “concrete step.” You may also recall that as soon as a Republican tried to adhere to Pay-go rules (passed by Democrats without a single Republican vote in favor), the BCT referred to him as “a petty dictator” and “the crazy uncle in the Senate attic.” That said, I have no illusion a BBA will have any good effect if for no other reasons than it would have more holes than Swiss cheese and make it easier to raise tax rates than cut spending.
As for “increasing revenue,” I agree as long as that increase comes from an expanding economy. When the BCT and other lefties refer to “increasing revenue,” however, they mean increasing tax rates. I’m relatively sure the BCT would like us to forget the BCT once conceded “Raising taxes could slow the economy.” Looking at this from the positive side, cutting tax RATES increases economic activity because people get to keep more of what they earn. It’s simple human behavior; the more you get to keep, the more you will produce. As a result, lower tax RATES result in greater tax revenue because the lower RATE applies to a bigger pie. For example, 40% of a 10” pie is 25% more than 50% of an 8” pie. If the BCT believes tax rate increases will help “deficit spending … to be addressed realistically,” it is ignoring history and logic. The best way to increase tax revenue is via an expanding economy, and higher tax rates work against that goal.
As for crocodile tears about only “minor cuts in spending,” consider BCT opposition to Gov. Tom Corbett’s then-proposed 2011-2012 commonwealth budget. Every BCT editorial on the topic bashed every proposed spending cut. Other than symbolic cuts by the General Assembly on itself and the executive branch on itself, the BCT “solution” to our debt/deficit problems was increasing taxation. You can bet the BCT will crucify any Republican who proposes serious spending cuts.
In the “I told you so” category, I concluded my critique of “Put up or shut up” with the following: “If BCT history serves as a guide, we can expect an editorial in the near future that does nothing more than claim this or that proposal stinks with no serious proposal of its own.” Thanks go to the BCT for fulfilling my prophesy.
“These failings represent the widespread breakdown of personal and civic responsibility. Like love and marriage, you can’t have one without the other.”
[RWC] Admittedly I’m no expert on this topic, but we can’t love someone we don’t marry?
“But then again look at the divorce rate in the United States.”
© 2004-2011 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.