Get rid of depts of education and hud.  And most of the 450 fed agencies.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:12 AM, mike [never forget] 532 <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
> talk about a stupid idea wow ! how did you come up with that one ?
>
> On Dec 29, 7:09 am, Travis <[email protected]> wrote:
> > No federal aid for states. No tax increases period.  Keep all Bush tax
> cuts.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 6:03 AM, mike [never forget] 532 <
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>  > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Fifty Herbert Hoovers
> > >http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/opinion/29krugman.html?th&emc=th
> > > No modern American president would repeat the fiscal mistake of 1932,
> > > in which the federal government tried to balance its budget in the
> > > face of a severe recession. The Obama administration will put deficit
> > > concerns on hold while it fights the economic crisis.
> >
> > > But even as Washington tries to rescue the economy, the nation will
> > > be
> > > reeling from the actions of 50 Herbert Hoovers — state governors who
> > > are slashing spending in a time of recession, often at the expense
> > > both of their most vulnerable constituents and of the nation's
> > > economic future.
> >
> > > These state-level cutbacks range from small acts of cruelty to giant
> > > acts of panic — from cuts in South Carolina's juvenile justice
> > > program, which will force young offenders out of group homes and into
> > > prison, to the decision by a committee that manages California state
> > > spending to halt all construction outlays for six months.
> >
> > > Now, state governors aren't stupid (not all of them, anyway). They're
> > > cutting back because they have to — because they're caught in a
> > > fiscal
> > > trap. But let's step back for a moment and contemplate just how crazy
> > > it is, from a national point of view, to be cutting public services
> > > and public investment right now.
> >
> > > Think about it: is America — not state governments, but the nation as
> > > a whole — less able to afford help to troubled teens, medical care
> > > for
> > > families, or repairs to decaying roads and bridges than it was one or
> > > two years ago? Of course not. Our capacity hasn't been diminished;
> > > our
> > > workers haven't lost their skills; our technological know-how is
> > > intact. Why can't we keep doing good things?
> >
> > > It's true that the economy is currently shrinking. But that's the
> > > result of a slump in private spending. It makes no sense to add to
> > > the
> > > problem by cutting public spending, too.
> >
> > > In fact, the true cost of government programs, especially public
> > > investment, is much lower now than in more prosperous times. When the
> > > economy is booming, public investment competes with the private
> > > sector
> > > for scarce resources — for skilled construction workers, for capital.
> > > But right now many of the workers employed on infrastructure projects
> > > would otherwise be unemployed, and the money borrowed to pay for
> > > these
> > > projects would otherwise sit idle.
> >
> > > And shredding the social safety net at a moment when many more
> > > Americans need help isn't just cruel. It adds to the sense of
> > > insecurity that is one important factor driving the economy down.
> >
> > > So why are we doing this to ourselves?
> >
> > > The answer, of course, is that state and local government revenues
> > > are
> > > plunging along with the economy — and unlike the federal government,
> > > lower-level governments can't borrow their way through the crisis.
> > > Partly that's because these governments, unlike the feds, are subject
> > > to balanced-budget rules. But even if they weren't, running temporary
> > > deficits would be difficult. Investors, driven by fear, are refusing
> > > to buy anything except federal debt, and those states that can borrow
> > > at all are being forced to pay punitive interest rates.
> >
> > > Are governors responsible for their own predicament? To some extent.
> > > Arnold Schwarzenegger, in particular, deserves some jeers. He became
> > > governor in the first place because voters were outraged over his
> > > predecessor's budget problems, but he did nothing to secure the
> > > state's fiscal future — and he now faces a projected budget deficit
> > > bigger than the one that did in Gray Davis.
> >
> > > But even the best-run states are in deep trouble. Anyway, we
> > > shouldn't
> > > punish our fellow citizens and our economy to spite a few local
> > > politicians.
> >
> > > What can be done? Ted Strickland, the governor of Ohio, is pushing
> > > for
> > > federal aid to the states on three fronts: help for the neediest, in
> > > the form of funding for food stamps and Medicaid; federal funding of
> > > state- and local-level infrastructure projects; and federal aid to
> > > education. That sounds right — and if the numbers Mr. Strickland
> > > proposes are huge, so is the crisis.
> >
> > > And once the crisis is behind us, we should rethink the way we pay
> > > for
> > > key public services.
> >
> > > As a nation, we don't believe that our fellow citizens should go
> > > without essential health care. Why, then, does a large share of
> > > funding for Medicaid come from state governments, which are forced to
> > > cut the program precisely when it's needed most?
> >
> > > An educated population is a national resource. Why, then, is basic
> > > education mainly paid for by local governments, which are forced to
> > > neglect the next generation every time the economy hits a rough
> > > patch?
> >
> > > And why should investments in infrastructure, which will serve the
> > > nation for decades, be at the mercy of short-run fluctuations in
> > > local
> > > budgets?
> >
> > > That's for later. The priority right now is to fight off the attack
> > > of
> > > the 50 Herbert Hoovers, and make sure that the fiscal problems of the
> > > states don't make the economic crisis even worse.
> >
> > --
> > *~@):~{>- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>  >
>


-- 
*~@):~{>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to