Surplus and Deficit

This will be brief, but here’s my take. A federal government surplus is a bad thing, no matter how much Democrats try to pretty it up. If the federal government has a surplus, that means it took too much of my money away from me. I promise you that money won’t be returned by Democrats with a note saying “sorry we overbilled you, here’s the balance back”. Instead, they’ll find a pet project or political action committee to give it to. Those who claim federal surpluses are a good thing are likely to be the very same people who will drive 5 miles back to Wal-Mart because they have a double charge on their receipt for a roll of toilet paper and demand a refund. Bush gave us the refund, that’s a good thing.

When we have deficits, it means the goverment is spending more than it’s taking in. The easiest answer to this is NOT raising taxes, it’s reducing spending. If you think raising taxes is the answer to deficits, then you probably believe the way out of credit card debt is increased limits, not fewer trips to the mall. I think we can all agree there are many goofy projects that federal money is being wasted on. Let’s review the Constitution and what it says our federales should be spending money on. Like $200,000 for a trucker congestion notification system in Tacoma, Washington, $500,000 to save the Prebles Meadow Jumping Mouse in Colorado, $62 million to promote the Sacajawea dollar coin, $1.5 million for taking care of the Vulcan Statue in Alabama built for the 1904 World’s Fair, and my personal favorite, “Elmo, the Sesame Street character, was invited by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education to “testify” on music education in schools. The puppet asked for $2 million for related programs.” Some will say the war is costing us to build deficits, but war is one of the few things mandated by the Constitution for spending money on… remember the whole “provide for the common defense”? (I know some will point to “promote the general welfare” to support social programs, but the forefathers certainly didn’t intend for people to not pull their own weight and rely, instead on a gubmint handout).

So, in a nutshell, the government should only spend on things allowed by the Constitution, tax according to such spending, no more, no less, and let the producers of the country keep more of what we work so hard for. Why is that so hard to understand?