Sean Duffy and the debt ceiling

I have consistently said that if the president is willing to cut up the credit card, I'm willing to pay the bill. But I cannot agree to a debt limit increase without serious, fundamental reforms to the way Washington spends your money. - Sean Duffy

Read the whole column, My take on debt ceiling and jobs, in the Wausau Daily Herald.

1 comment:

Siarlys Jenkins said...

It's a little more complex than that, and Duffy is too smart not to know it, deep down inside. The only sensible way to settle budget questions is to set aside the screaming slogans "No tax increases" and "No cuts," recognize that there really ain't no such thing as a free lunch, and sort out which government functions we really want, how much will they cost, and how are we going to pay for it.

The notion that "tax increases kills jobs" is even more ludicrous than "deficit spending creates jobs." Some degree of deficit spending helps when the private sector is freezing up -- if the banks won't lend money to business start-ups, then if they lend it to the feds at least something will be spent on work that will keep some people employed. Preferably, it should be spent on something that will last us twenty years or more and be really useful, not make-work. But when there is money to be made, nobody ever walked away from a million dollars because they would only get to spend half of it -- and right now, nobody gets taxed anywhere near 50% anyway.

My favorite conservative, David Brooks, explained this very well:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/12/opinion/12brooks.html?_r=1&ref=davidbrooks

Bill Clinton put the budget into surplus, and started paying down the debt. Republicans decided to "give the surplus back to the people" when "the people" were on the hook for $5 trillion plus interest. When Bush left office, this left us $10 trillion in debt. Republicans have a lot of nerve complaining about the size of the debt -- but its true that we have to get back to what Bill Clinton was doing right.