We have found the enemy and it is us.
We refuse to take the time to educate ourselves on complex issues. Apparently, to most of us, things are pretty simple, and anyone who attempts to explore them in any detail is quickly branded an “elitist” a “One-Worlder” or worse. That kind of thinking used to be in the minority. It was assumed that our educational system would turn out people with an ability to look at issues in depth, with a broader view. Well, not only did that not happen, the system has somehow bred a generation of narrow minds with a strictly narrow viewpoint and a narrow approach to learning.
Schools no longer teach things like Civics, World History, Geography, Great Literature, etc. – subjects which exposed a mind to the broad world we live in. The whole person is now sacrificed to a narrow world of math and science, in the belief that this is where the world is going.
Indeed children are merely test scores anymore, because the system rewards the highest scores with cash. Never mind that a national scandal has erupted, disclosing widespread skewed scoring, allowing a generation of poorly educated children to “pass.”
Thank you “No Child Left Behind.”
There is no money for “The Arts,” therefore the concept of a “whole” child is limited to how well they can perform a fairly narrow range of predictable sciences. We promote narrow, controlled vision. Is it any wonder, then, that this is reflected in our political thinking?
I’ll just list one example of this, out of many. Let’s examine the latest rallying cry of The Tea Party – a mandated balanced budget. Sounds great, doesn’t it? Of course. It appeals to the narrow vision that all things are really simple, and if they’re not, they should be.
If the U.S. had had a mandated balanced budget back in 2003, we could not have invaded Iraq. Hey, Maybe this is a good thing after all! There was no money for this debacle and none was allocated. We “simply” gave our government a blank check and told them to do whatever they thought they should. There was no (well, very little) debate. Anyone calling for restraint was labeled unpatriotic – even a traitor. The country was still in shock and mad as hell over 911. We wanted revenge, and it didn’t matter where we got it – money be damned. If anyone had called for a mandated balanced budget back then how do you think they would have received?
How has that worked out for us? Anybody want to take a guess as to how much has been added to our national debt? And it still goes on today.
Fast forward to today, when we hear of various attempts at attacking the U.S. almost every day. What if one of them succeeds? What if it results in major damage? What if, God forbid, a country like China declares war upon the U.S.? (far-fetched, I know, but not impossible.) Our responses would be strictly limited under a mandated balanced budget. We would “simply” be forced to stand by and take it.
Widespread crop failures are not unknown, and the government has been known to step in with temporary subsidies to aid farmers until things got better. In addition, more money has been spent, at times, importing food when Americans were threatened with shortages. Can a case for this be made, or should such foolish wasteful spending be severely restricted under a mandated balanced budget?
Some of our allies have suffered great calamities, and we have poured in huge amounts of financial and other aid. Many countries around the world would be in much greater despair if it was not for the aid they receive from America. How much help would be available from us if we had a mandated balanced budget? Should that even be a consideration? The world today is a shaky, complex place, and appears to require great flexibility in readiness to respond to a wide range of possibilities.
Like it or not. Approve of it or not – The United States didn’t become a great world power by penny pinching. The gap between income and outgo was absolutely huge right after World War Two, when we financed The Marshall Plan in spite of our own needs. It couldn’t have happened under a mandated balanced budget. Most folks would say that was money well spent.
There is no doubt and no argument that much more fiscal responsibility is absolutely necessary. Easy come, easy go seems to have been our motto for far too long. A balanced budget is a legitimate goal – one that will require restraint in spending and an increase in revenue in order to properly address the issue.
It is quite similar to the budget for an average family. When the bills outweigh the income, spending, except for necessities, must stop and some way must be sought to pay off the creditors. Often, that means working a second job or selling off assets to raise more money. “Simply” cutting spending doesn’t solve the problem unless you want to bankrupt and walk away from your debts. That stays on your record for a long time, however, and severely restricts what you are allowed to do.
Reducing the national debt must become a priority. Some type of “means” test should be required to approve any new spending. People are right who say that if we don’t address the debt problem, we are courting financial disaster. Spending is a major cause of the problem, everyone agrees.
A mandated balanced budget, however, would be extremely counter- productive. It would severely restrict our ability to re-pay the debt we already owe. It would hamper our ability to act in times of threat, and it would restrict our ability to capture windfall profits in unexpected good times.
Beware anyone offering simple solutions, especially those which severely restrict our ability to act with flexibility.
6 comments:
The only “simple solution” or rather simpleton solution is that of Noble Collins and all of the other simpleton liberals that think those with a job and producing a benefit to the US are going to keep on working and give their money to those who do not work and expect the “government” (those who pay the taxes) to pay them for the little if anything that they do.
Mr. Collins,
Did you actually take the time to read any of the Balanced Budget Amendment proposals before you wrote this? Don't get me wrong, I too am not in favor of a BBA; but for different reasons. You spent much of your article expressing concern over how a BBA would limit our ability to respond to an attack. Every BBA proposal deals with that situation and clearly states that with a simple vote of Congress, the BBA would be waived in any year the US is at war or engaged in a serious military operation.
You wrote, "It would severely restrict our ability to re-pay the debt we already owe." No it would not. It states that the BBA does not apply to borrowing money or the payment of debt.
You made some good points and there are good reasons to oppose the BBA, but those are not two of them.
We have a current financial crisis in Washington due to out-of-control spending (by both parties and during several president's terms). We need to take measures to solve this issue right now, before it gets worse. A BBA will not do what we need. Remember, this is a proposed amendment to the Constitution. If it passed Congress, it must be ratified by 3/4 (38) of the states. They are typically given up to seven years to ratify an amendment. Various BBA versions have provisions which state it will not take effect until 2-5 years after it is ratified. The soonest it would be in effect is 2017 and it could be into the 2020's. By that time, it will be too late and the debt would be over $20 trillion, at the present rate.
This has to change right now and it has to be done without changing our Constitution. The House has the power to effect a change in direction and we need them to do just that.
Back away from the "faux" news channel and you will see schools do actually still teach Civics, World History, Geography, Great Literature, etc. I would put my 3 children aged 24, 20, 17 (public school educated) up against any so called older citizen and they blow them out of the water on this any any subject.
Please stop perpetuating these false statements, Arizona gets enough bad press. Maybe if we actually spent time on the real issues of Arizona, companies would come to our state.
You say, “Schools no longer teach things like Civics, World History, Geography, Great Literature, etc. – subjects which exposed a mind to the broad world we live in. The whole person is now sacrificed to a narrow world of math and science, in the belief that
this is where the world is going.
Indeed children are merely test scores anymore, because the system rewards the highest scores with cash.”
Then you lecture with, “We refuse to take the time to educate ourselves on complex issues. Apparently, to most of us, things are pretty simple, and anyone who attempts to explore them in any detail is quickly branded an “elitist” a “One-Worlder” or worse.”
Do you ever read what you write?
Simpleton liberals? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Nobody is more "simpleton" than the Tea Party. They're handing the country over to the very wealthy without even realizing it. I know some Tea Party people and their political views are absolutely naive bordering on ignorant. I think people with an IQ under 100 shouldn't be allowed to vote.
To Mr. Ehlers - If I could make sense from your comment, perhaps I might respond.
To Born Conservative - Over riding the BBA would require a two thirds vote from the congress. Based on recent antics, that is certainly no basis for security. The BBA may very well not restrict borrowing money per-se, but it predicated upon balancing that loan with offsets - hardly a flexible option.
We agree that a BBA is not a solution.
To Anonymous - I can never tell which Anonymous I am addressing, but regardless, Perhaps my statement concerning curriculum was
a bit overstated, but the fact remains that in poll after poll, high School and college students in general can't tell you a thing about history or government or literature. Of course there are exceptions, thank God, but the courses I mentioned have either been downsized or in many cases eliminated. I personally wrote a column about Green Valley Park and Rumsey Park a while back. I found a great number of local students who couldn't tell me a thing about them, Some even didn't know where they are. These are not assumptions based on bad publicity. Far too many kids graduate from high school with broad world knowledge.
To Do as I say - I can't find any contradiction in my words
Post a Comment