Patterson: Economic recovery can't happen until we deal with spending addiction
Tom Patterson
East Valley resident Tom Patterson (pattersontomc@cox.net) is a retired physician and former state senator.
Welcome to the discussion.
-
Current users sign in here.
14 comments:
Rules of Conduct
© Copyright 2013, East Valley Tribune, Tempe, AZ. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy]
A Division of 10/13 Communications
downtownresident posted at 7:19 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Tom
Where were you when George Bush was in office?
Or, is it only a problem to spend like a drunken sailor if you are a Democrat?
Dale Whiting posted at 8:03 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Where was Tom? He was in the State Senate. What was he doing? Likely he was spending and that's why he avoids his past. Or he was practicing medicine making lots of money off of Medicare and Medicaid. The typical physician was over billing, i.e. having his billing staff pump up the services rendered opening up the door to today's need for healthcare reform.
But if not, Tom should fill us in. He does not have a Wikipedia page.
One thing is for sure. He's unwilling to admit that deficite spending was caused in major part by waging a fony war off the books. We call that war "Iraq." And it has led us to continuing a war of no return, which we call "Afghanistan." One million dollars per soldier per year. That is military-industrial complexia if ever there was a diagnosis to give it. Just imgine the good all that money could do if those men and women were building infractructure right her in the good ol US of A!
How does one balance the books? Try taking some debt relief councelling. Either increase income or decrease spending [or both is best] and negotiate with the creditors. Here the creditors include entitlement recipients [but the elderly vote like mad]. And the revenues include both tax breaks [like a lower rate for investment income] and reduced tax rates for all, including those who still make money, the old fashion way, by earning it. And we mustt not forget all of those deduction breaks, most of which were engineered for the 1%er's.
One thing is for sure. We have proven over and over again since the days of Ronald Reagan. "Trickle Down" economics is a fraud. So keeping tax rates low on the most wealthy does not create jobs in the US. Those jobs "trickle down" in China, India, Vietnam, the Philipeans [just have a look at the 'made in " tags on the clothing you are wearing right now!
Tom, try telling us "the rest of the story" next time you write us a piece.
Arizona Willie posted at 8:29 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
It was taxing the rich versus tax reform,
[ the Republican version of tax reform is more and more tax cuts for the wealthy ]
************
that we are all finding out that it's less painful to walk over hot coals than to cut spending in the modern welfare state
[ and it is also less painful to walk over hot coals that to raise taxes on the wealthy who receive the most from our society ].
************
We could take 100 percent of the income of America's millionaires and still reduce the deficit less than 10 percent.
[ However, that would pay down huge chunks of the deficit.
No one said that raising taxes on the wealthy would pay the deficit off in one year.
You Republicans took 8 years to BORROW AND SPEND the nation into this deficit.
No one expects it to be paid off in one year.]
************
Oh wait. Tax cuts don't stimulate the economy, we're told, but we'll cause a recession if these taxes are restored. You can't have it both ways.
[ Democrats can show that tax cuts have NOT stimulated the economy.
Republicans claim that elimination of the tax cuts for the wealthy will cause a recession.
Two opposite positions -- no one is trying to have it both ways.]
************
. In Iraq, where Obama pulled the troops out when time was up rather than when goals were achieved, conditions seem to be reverting to those that were present before we spent our dollars and blood over there.
[ The Afghan society is not our responsibility.
We went there in pursuit of Al Queda not to remake the country. ]
************
But the sooner we deal with our spending addiction,
[ The Republican Party is addicted to tax cuts for their wealthy supporters and cutting revenue is worse than spending.]
JNelson posted at 9:16 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Dr. Patterson.....all too true. Unfortunately, the country has lots of people like "Downtownresident" who just prefer to say Bush was bad, too, instead of actually addressing the problem now. It makes no difference at this late date who was most to blame when solving the problems is urgent.
Then we have the "Dales" of the world who seem to prefer to blame specific government actions like wars instead of understanding that it is the over-spending policy of the president and Congress which is the problem, not what the spending goes for, whether it is for wars or entitlements or even just waste. Stop budgeting excessive spending (which requires massive borrowing), live within the revenue obtained and few of those things will occur.
And then there are the "ArizonaWillies" who seem to think only Republicans are to blame, that Dem overspending must be for a good cause because it is so "compassionate" and looks out for the poor or needy or even the irresponsible, ignoring the class warfare that it instigates and most importantly, ignoring how such policies at the federal level actually violate the Constitution.
So it seems a sizable portion of the public would rather just continue down the slippery slope we are on, blame others for being as much or even more responsible for our predicament (if they even recognize that we HAVE a predicament), and kick the can even farther down the road where someone else will have to be responsible for it. Combine that with the huge percentage of people who now are dependent upon big government handouts or excessive entitlement benefits (even though they may have paid into them) and a political class desperate to avoid potential re-election defeat and the likelihood of seeing our fiscal nightmare being corrected any time soon seems mighty slim to me.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:21 am on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Tom,
I say "the heck with it", take us over the cliff. The sooner it happens the sooner we can recover.
Obama and the democrats are going to tax the rich, cut the military and then stall the tax, entitlement and welfare reforms. We will be worse off than ever before. Obamacare and the new EPA requirements will hit us right between the eyes and knock us flat. Why can't the liberal/progressives see this? Are they waiting for some kind of miracle to happen? Then only solution is to tax everyone more and spend a lot less, but they can't see it. The rich will have to suffer by paying more taxes, the poor will have to suffer by getting less free stuff and the middle class will have to suffer by getting less and paying more. We only have to look at Europe to see the results of decades of over spending and what it will cause.
So, bend over and spread them because it's gonna hurt.
Arizona Willie posted at 12:16 pm on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
chatmandu, you said " Then only solution is to tax everyone more and spend a lot less, but they can't see it. The rich will have to suffer by paying more taxes, the poor will have to suffer by getting less free stuff and the middle class will have to suffer by getting less and paying more."
*********
You are correct!!
About time a right winger acknowledges that we have to raise taxes AS WELL AS cutting some spending.
That is the ONLY way the deficit will < ever > be reduced.
But most Republicans refuse to even consider raising taxes on the wealthy and corporations in any realistic manner, even though they have the lowest tax rates in history already.
All most Republicans want to do is cut spending on programs that help those who cannot afford to make huge campaign contributions ... almost like they want to penalize the poor for being poor.
Social programs are the LAST thing a humane society would cut.
But Republicans ONLY want to cut social programs and refuse to touch the bloated defense budget.
We could probably save enough money to pay off 1/3 of the deficit in one year if we closed all the American military bases in England, Germany, France, Japan and other countries that no one is threatening anymore nor is it likely they will come under any threat in the foreseeable future.
Rich posted at 2:42 pm on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Are you facing the problem? Or just the symptoms? Isn't the problem a bloated bureaucracy that has past the point of diminishing returns? Government consumes over 40% of the GDP, with a subsequent loss of freedom for the rest of us, waste out of control, and an administration without the will to do anything other than expand it. 40%+ ? That's the cream and a lot of milk. And the expense just keeps on keeping on. Government has to return at least 5% to the society this year, or recovery will not happen. The 'business as usual/pray for a miracle' policy we've pursued for four years has failed, despite the fact we barely endorsed it (I'd say based on lies, but every election is based on that.) Government must shrink about 12% or we're sunk. Bloated defense budget? Sure, cut it, along with EVERY other thing the government does. How, freeze taxes and put a moratorium on hiring, new programs, implementation of anything, Tell the bureaucracy that the gravy train is officially parked and we need an honest day's work for an honest day's pay. That we need the same jobs done with less people for less money. And then elect people who are good enough to see that that is what happens. Overspending is only a part of the problem, over hiring, over regulation, and fat cat bureaucracy are major factors in the governmental binge that caused the problem, and putting it all on one has some pretty nasty unintentioned consequences, as I am sure we will see in the coming year. We elected 'more of the same' and that's what we are very likely to get.
Noanarchy posted at 3:40 pm on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
The problem with our industrial world can be summed up in one word, Greed. There is more than enough to go around but the haves want even more, so the take it sometime in the form of reducing jobs for others.Progress not Socialism and government will need to do more create jobs as it has in the past. I was surprised at public acceptance of the claim, ”Government does not create jobs.” It does. For example, the Internet was established by connecting various agencies mostly government. Industry is now engaged in space use and exploration, that plus many new commercial innovations grew from NASA operations. Subsidies for hauling mail helped create the airlines; the Transcontinental Railroad really united the States, as did the telegraph wire.
Just a sample of progress from our Government complying with the Constitutional mandate to, ”promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” The Stock Market will not do that; it is the millionaire’s casino. The 401K, a poor substitute for pensions, which provided workers security and investment capital.
The South demands smaller and less government, but government played a large part in denying, then promoting liberty as well as their commerce. Progress came after the Federal Government. Electric power from the Tennessee Valley Authority provided the opportunity for all to prosper. The south is joined by Western States that benefit from giant Dams that harnessed waterways, for power and year round sustain life water supply. Some of their leaders subvert the First Amendment to retain power.
Reagan made government the enemy but he used it and abused it. Those who talk of States rights forget history or abuse of human rights in days past by states second We are United and that has been to our advantage over Euorpe. There are more people than jobs and being retired and a consumer Mr Patterson is helping create jobs and giving a young family an opportunity to work. Social Security has created more job and created new industries. Grover Norqest should be tried for his subverive interference with the Constitutional dutires of our Congress.
Rich posted at 6:37 pm on Sun, Nov 18, 2012.
Nanarchy,
You missed my point at least. I didn't say the government can't or doesn't create jobs. In fact I agreed that they had created jobs to the point of diminishing returns, in other words, overproduced them. And the recession was as much a part of governmental overproduction as private sector overproduction. The problem created, that has yet to be cured, is that government continues to grow, while the private sector does not, creating an imbalance that can only be a downward spiral. A bloated government brings with economic problems and societal ones. Laws on seats in cars, smoking, and condoms in porno movies, silly assaults on freedom to divert our attention and get re-elected. This last election used greed, rich people are evil. Roosevelt created it because in 1936, the new deal failed. It is a nonsense meme, but it just elected it's second failure to the White House. So long as you cling to it, there is no hope of recovery this side of World War 3. Analyze it. Rich people sit on money when the government is a failure and they cannot predict where they will profit by spending it. If they were greedy, that would hardly be the case, would it?
mnjcpa posted at 8:00 am on Mon, Nov 19, 2012.
JNelson, Rich, and chatman ALL make great points.
Dale's always obsessed with Bush and wars - nothing new. Trouble with his view is it's deluded. When anyone studies the monetary system for any length of time will tell you the largest problem with our monetary problems are UNFUNDED entitlements of social security and medicare that the politicians refuse to deal with.
And AZWillie, well let's just say he's the new 1% - the guys and gals of labor and government unions that are multi-millionaires retiring in their early 50's is like a pot calling a kettle black. His constant ranting on the Republicans is really only a thinly veiled disguise to assure that windfalls like his continue.
All the next 4 years is going to be is more of the same. Recession, layoffs, pull back on investments - without any change to the problems at hand. Obama is proposing $1.7 trillion in new taxes, but only $800 billion is coming from the `rich`. How else do you think they government wizards will extract that revenue?
You can bet it will come from the lower ends of the 1% brackets, who have and are shouldering the burdens of people like Willie.
VofReason posted at 2:45 pm on Mon, Nov 19, 2012.
Interesting that Dale is an expert on seemingly everything but knows little or nothing about Medicaid and Medicare. If he did, he would know that Medicare is by policy the lowest payer for services. In fact, if you as a provider accept less for your service from another payer, Medicare has the right to pay you that lower amount for that service. Medicaid is less than Medicare. So, the Commercial insurances are what keeps most Hospitals and Doctors afloat. Oh, and there is a yearly threat that Medicare (and therefore Medicaid) will slice the scant payments they are currently makeing to "balance the budget". This is why Doctors are deciding it isn't worth it and students are thinking hard whether to rack up debt to become doctors.
VofReason posted at 2:00 pm on Tue, Nov 20, 2012.
But other then that, Government run Healthcare is chugging along just fine. And as bad as Obamacare seems now, it will likely get worse as the new "benefits" come on line.
DonMey posted at 4:05 pm on Tue, Nov 20, 2012.
Dale - The "fony" (it is spelled phony) war cost the DoD less than 800 million. Brown university tried to calculate every possible cent that the Iraq war could possibly cost us, all the way to 2050, and they only hit 4 trillion. 4 trillion over 40 years is a drop in the bucket of what the federal government spends.
And notice how no one addresses the points made, they just plug their ears, scream BUSH really loud, and sit back, feeling smug in their bubble.
DonMey posted at 4:06 pm on Tue, Nov 20, 2012.
Bah, meant billion, not million for cost of war. (which was less than one year of Obama deficits)