Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Burden on Our Kids? They Will Thank Us (Why Bush's critics are mostly wrong)
The Los Angeles Times ^ | December 7, 2003 | David Gelernter

Posted on 12/08/2003 12:49:23 PM PST by quidnunc

New Haven, Conn – Some people want to know, how can the Bush administration commit the moral perfidy of first squandering the Clinton budget surplus, then running up huge deficits that the "next generation" will have to pay for?

The assumptions beneath this question are all wrong. The looming deficit might or might not be important, but it has no moral implications of any kind. As for the economy, the president's performance has not been perfect, but he's done fine under the circumstances. The mistakes he has made would have been hard for any president to avoid.

It would be nice if the deficit were smaller. Then again, borrowing money is, at base, a bet that you will be richer in the future than you are today. Will this nation continue — allowing for regular business-cycle fluctuations — to grow richer? We don't really know, anything could happen, who can say, no one can predict — waffle, waffle, waffle — and the answer is yes. So, it's hard to get too worked up over the deficit. Most Americans agree. Anyone who thinks that the deficit is hot news in the sushi bars and Thai restaurants of Middle America has not been paying attention.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Government
KEYWORDS:
If you're one of those who refuses to register with the LA Times, just move on to another thread because I don't want to hear about it!

Besides, if you haven't read Gelernter's article you can't comment on it intelligently.

1 posted on 12/08/2003 12:49:24 PM PST by quidnunc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Okay, I am not going to register so I can read the article, but I do regret being unable to read a piece by David Gelerntner who is a very good writer. He suffered a maiming injury in one of the Unabomber's attacks and was very nearly killed. He is a fine conservative thinker, and I always pay attention to his work.
2 posted on 12/08/2003 1:02:01 PM PST by Irene Adler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Besides, if you haven't read Gelernter's article you can't comment on it intelligently.

Well Gelernter certainly hasn't contributed anything new to intelligent discussion.
Instead, he trots out the same old lame excuses and pack of lies:

Gelertner is an idiot.

3 posted on 12/08/2003 1:11:00 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Oh, yes. Thanks. Thanks a thousand times over for spending billions of dollars you don't have year after year. Thanks again for creating new entitlements so that over half of the federal budget can continue to be robbing Peter to pay Paul for Paul's vote. And in case I forget, let me say thanks for spending all those trillions collected for Social Security, and then expecting future generations to go without so you can have that tax money spent on you again.
4 posted on 12/08/2003 1:25:37 PM PST by Gunslingr3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Or just use the VRWC Universal Password:

username: Hildabeast
password: Isaliar

Works every time.

5 posted on 12/08/2003 1:28:35 PM PST by Chairman Fred (@mousiedung.commie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Good article, and worth registering for. An interesting take on the deficit, and one that bears some consideration.

Thanks, quidnunc!

6 posted on 12/08/2003 1:29:14 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
I'm not sure that I understand where Gelernter was going, or where he ended up. There weren't any (in my opinion) reasonable explanations as to why our boys seem to have developed a chronic spending fetish. Also, I disagree with his using the tax cuts in the deficit equation because the tax cuts amount to 1% of the budget when you get right down to it. A 1% spread out over a decade. They have a hard time keeping spending increases under 6% over the previous year. It's the same dance with a bit nicer music - they're spending too much.
7 posted on 12/08/2003 1:30:38 PM PST by Jaysun (Get real, Control-Everybody-But-Yourselves freaks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Overthrowing tyrants is a gift that keeps giving. Howard Dean's grandchildren will bless George W. Bush. And if future generations wind up paying part of the tab, I doubt they will whine. More likely they will thank us, and write books about what a great generation we were.

In the past few decades "we" have borrowed money to fund the silicon revolution, the genomics revolution, the environmental revolution (yes, Virginia, the air and water really are cleaner than they were 40 years ago), the Internet, and the democratic revolution in Eastern Europe. We're borrowing money now to keep the world safe from Islamofascists.

This will more than make up for the money wasted on the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs, the War on Republicans, and other insane governmental schemes.

Our grandchildren will, indeed, thank us.

8 posted on 12/08/2003 1:37:47 PM PST by AZLiberty (Where Arizona turns for dry humor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irene Adler
Did you see Post 5? You can use this:

username: Hildabeast
password: Isaliar

9 posted on 12/08/2003 1:38:17 PM PST by DumpsterDiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
What a freaking Moron.

Comparing the deficit to a 20 year mortgage?

"if I take out a 20-year mortgage on my house, that doesn't mean I'm inflicting my debts on my children or the next generation."

Well it does if you take out a 20-year mortgage every year and then saddle your kids with the interest payment

Typical me,me,me,me Live for the moment baby boomer. He even states as such in the last paragraph, To paraphrase/translate his whole point "Who cares about long term economics as long as we are living the good life right now"




10 posted on 12/08/2003 1:42:43 PM PST by qam1 (@Starting Generation X Ping list - Freep me to be added and see my home page for details)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Make an irrelevant comparison of deficits to GDP.

I'm curious. Why is the deficit as a percentage of GDP irrelevant? Seems to me that if I have annual income of $100,000 I can afford to assume a lot more debt, for instance on a mortgage, than I can if I have an income of $50,000. How exactly does this analogy differ from that of GDP/deficit?

11 posted on 12/08/2003 1:49:32 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gunslingr3
>>>> Oh, yes. Thanks. Thanks a thousand times over for spending billions of dollars you don't have year after year. <<<<

Well, thats a lot better than klintonistas placing such a LARGE TAX BURDEN on the middle class, that He (Klinton), was spending billions of dollars every year of money I dont have to spare! The government has NO BUSINESS having a SURPLUS at the PEOPLES EXPENSE!!!!!!!

Klinton and most liberals are WRONG. The peoples money belongs to the people - not on the nanny-socialist nation the klinton regime desired, each generation can pay the debts of those before them, why the "L" not? it aint hurting them!

Better a debt, than to pay for the welfare state and moral decay on the backs of good, hard-working, tax-paying people!
12 posted on 12/08/2003 1:49:49 PM PST by Roughneck (". . .For there is going to come a time when people won't listen to the truth. . .")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: qam1; ItsOurTimeNow; PresbyRev; tortoise; Fraulein; StoneColdGOP; Clemenza
Xer Ping

Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social aspects that directly effects Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1982*) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.

New: Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details.

13 posted on 12/08/2003 2:01:55 PM PST by qam1 (@Starting Generation X Ping list - Freep me to be added and see my home page for details)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
your example precisely illustrates the inanity of the comparison of comparing GDP and budget deficit -- in your own example you compared INCOME with ability to service debt.




14 posted on 12/08/2003 2:05:23 PM PST by LN2Campy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
Why is the deficit as a percentage of GDP irrelevant? Seems to me that if I have annual income of $100,000 I can afford to assume a lot more debt, for instance on a mortgage, than I can if I have an income of $50,000.

If $20K of your annual income was already committed to simply making INTEREST payments on existing debt (mortgages, student loans, car loans, credit card debt, etc.), I doubt that you'd be able to borrow 1 more penny anywhere.

15 posted on 12/08/2003 2:06:29 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Ignore that close to 20% of federal revenue is already dedicated to make just the interest payments on the debt.

That's about the same amount of my revenue that went to the mortgage interest payments when I first bought my house. But since then, my revenue has gone up significantly while the interest payment is so low now that I'll probably end up using the standard deduction this year.

16 posted on 12/08/2003 2:14:56 PM PST by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LN2Campy
It never ceases to amaze me how so many people keep excusing the spending and debt being racked up every year. There hasn't been an entitlement yet that didn't grow far in exess of long-term projections. This latest one with prescription drugs will be no different.

Sure, we can afford to service the debt load now with historicly low interest rates. What happens in a few years if we end up with 1970's style interest rates? We could be looking at somewhere close to $1 trillion a year in interest payments on top of the social security and medicare payments for the boomers.
17 posted on 12/08/2003 2:15:47 PM PST by Orangedog (difference between a hamster & a gerbil?..there's more dark-meat on a hamster!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
That's about the same amount of my revenue that went to the mortgage interest payments when I first bought my house. But since then, my revenue has gone up significantly while the interest payment is so low now that I'll probably end up using the standard deduction this year.

Well Ditto, I'm will to bet that you also paid down some of the principle on your mortgage as well.
And as your annual revenue increased, you didn't make a habit of spending 20~30% more than you earned each and every year.

18 posted on 12/08/2003 2:24:57 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: qam1
Here's something for discussion: Why are Republicans in Congress spending money like there was no tomorrow? What happened to balancing budgets and cutting spending?

And I'm not talking about expenditures related to the War on Terror. I'm talking about the GOP spending our cash just like the did prior to '94 when we took over, ostensibly to halt such gluttony.
19 posted on 12/08/2003 2:34:05 PM PST by StoneColdGOP (McClintock - In Your Heart, You Know He's Right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Chairman Fred
Darn you!
I thought you were serious. :)
20 posted on 12/08/2003 2:44:40 PM PST by Tigercap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LN2Campy
your example precisely illustrates the inanity of the comparison of comparing GDP and budget deficit -- in your own example you compared INCOME with ability to service debt.

Maybe you need to speak more slowly for me.:)

Does not the GDP of a society correspond (as much as anything can) to the INCOME of a family? And is there not a relationship (although often affected by other factors) between income and ability to service debt?

I think a more relevant comparison is between GDP and debt, not deficit. Most people confuse debt and deficit.

Have you seen the amounts for debt as a percentage of GDP? My understanding is that they are lower than they have frequently been in the past.

21 posted on 12/08/2003 2:47:14 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LN2Campy
I think I just figured out your point on #14. You think the government's income is what should be compared to the deficit, not GDP.

I'm not sure I agree. The government is not an individual. Its income is merely the amount of our GDP (national income) that our society has jointly agreed to allocate to pay our joint expenses.

22 posted on 12/08/2003 3:01:35 PM PST by Restorer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Restorer
Have you seen the amounts for debt as a percentage of GDP? My understanding is that they are lower than they have frequently been in the past.

Yes I have seen the numbers. The Debt as a % of GDP is 61.4% in 2003 which is up from 60.2% in 2002 up from 56.8% in 2001 so it is growing.

It's recent highest was in 1996 at 67.3% so it is down but the way the "Smaller Government" Republicans are spending who knows for how long.

I am just utterly amazed that Republicans/Conservatives including Rush who used to rally against the massive deficit spending of the past Democratic congresses are now defending these inexcusable deficits.

23 posted on 12/08/2003 11:20:01 PM PST by qam1 (@Starting Generation X Ping list - Freep me to be added and see my home page for details)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson