Monday, October 11, 2010

Why would you want to hamstring the federal government?

I'm curious; I've seen many a Republican ad pushing for cutting back or eliminating the Federal Bank and creating a balanced budget law; I don't understand why anyone - Republican or otherwise - would want this.

Creating a balanced budget amendment means that, all those tax cuts that they would like to extend, would require more than a 22% cut in the federal budget -- after all, in 2008 the US was still spending more than it received in tax receipts.  Can you imagine what happens, when the government can no longer borrow to increase spending (either directly or indirectly through tax cuts), and a recession hits?  Can you imagine when the federal government is forced to cut back 30% instead of 22%?  I know some people think that private spending would increase...but you're not introducing new money into circulation by cutting back borrowing; you're in fact doing the opposite and matching cuts in the private economy with that in the public.

What happens if you cut out the Federal Bank?  Chaos.  The Feds have served as a means to flatten both growth and contraction of the economy.  Removing their ability to flatten the market between highs and lows, is to allow the market to build up to even larger boom and busts.

But I can see WHY people are led to believe in these ludicrous ideas: correlative conclusions that are inferred or stated as causation.

No comments: