Debt Ceiling Debate: Don’t Mention Warfare/Welfare State!

undefined

The US Treasury’s recent announcement that the government will reach the debt ceiling on November 3 means Congress will soon be debating raising the government’s borrowing limit again. Any delay in, or opposition to, raising the debt ceiling will inevitably be met with hand-wringing over Congress’ alleged irresponsibility. But the real irresponsible act would be for Congress to raise the debt ceiling.Cutting up its credit card is the only way to make Congress reduce spending. Anyone who doubts this should listen to the bipartisan whining over how sequestration has so drastically reduced spending that there is literally nothing left to cut. But, according to the Heritage Foundation, sequestration has only reduced spending from $3.6 trillion to $3.5 trillion. Only in DC would a less than one percent spending reduction be considered a draconian cut.

Defense hawks have found a way around sequestration by shoving billions of dollars into the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) account. OCO spending is classified as “emergency” spending so it does not count against the spending limits, even when OCO is used for items that do not fit any reasonable definition of emergency.

Yet, even using OCO to boost military spending by as much as $80 billion does not satisfy the military-industrial complex’s ravenous appetite for taxpayer dollars.

During the majority of my time in Congress, debt ceiling increases were routinely approved. In fact, congressional rules once allowed the House of Representatives to increase the debt ceiling without a vote or even a debate! Congress’ need to appear to respond to growing concerns over federal spending has forced it to end the practice of rubber-stamping debt ceiling increases.

Continuously increasing spending will lead to rising inflation as the Federal Reserve tries to monetize the ever-increasing debt. This will eventually lead to a serious economic crisis. When the crisis occurs, Congress will have no choice but to cut spending. The question is not if, but when and under what circumstances, spending will be cut.

The only alternative for cutting spending in response to economic crisis involves Congress gradually unwinding the welfare state in a manner that does not harm those dependent on federal programs. Congress will not even consider doing this until enough people have embraced the ideas of liberty to force the politicians to reconsider the proper role of government.

Those who accept the premises of the welfare statists are incapable of making principled arguments against welfare and entitlement programs. Thus, they can only quibble over spending levels or how to more efficiently manage the federal bureaucracy. While fiscal conservatives may gain some minor victories with this approach, their failure to challenge the welfare state’s morality or effectiveness dooms any effort to seriously curtail welfare state spending.

Similarly, one cannot favor both serious reductions in the military budget and an aggressive foreign policy. So-called cheap hawks may achieve some reforms in the Pentagon’s budget. They many even succeed in killing a few wasteful weapons projects. However, their unwillingness to oppose a foreign policy of perpetual war means they will always cave in to the war hawks’ demands for ever-higher military budgets.

Those who understand the dangers from continuing on our current path should support efforts to stop Congress from raising the debt ceiling. However, supporters of liberty will not win the political battle over government spending on welfare and warfare until we win the intellectual battle over the role of government. Those of us who know the truth must do all we can to spread the ideas of liberty.


 

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
rhs jr
rhs jr

The majority of voters in the USA are “The 1964 Civil Rights Act Minorities” (that includes White females) and they are Liberals. There is as much chance of electing a financially responsible government as there is of significantly increasing national morals, Public School SAT Scores or millions of new high paying jobs. Besides, the Federal Government won’t go broke because it prints hundreds of billions per year out of thin air and will print trillions if it needs too. What will happen is the dollar will crash causing hyperinflation like Zimbabwe giving the POTUS the justification for Executive Orders, Martial Law, postponement of elections, a new “sola e-money & chip” for all buying and selling, and their coveted New World Order for the US and most of the British Empire (except Ireland and Scotland). LOL if you want but this is the bed that TPTB planned and the Useful Idiots voted for (and will have to sleep in). TPTB will encounter resistance to their tyranny in Europe which will become neutral; but Russia, China, the BRICs and the Muslims will attack and invade US.

Kill Bill
Kill Bill

What debt ceiling has ever not seen it blown up (under dems and derms)?

Politicians lovz dem sum detz.

BUCKHED
BUCKHED

Actually,with the exception of Obozo, spending has been less when a Demorat is in charge .

card802
card802

Congress controls spending, not the head fucknut.

“If we dice up these same data a different way, we can easily see that regardless of administration, expenditures tended to be lower when Republicans controlled all or part of Congress than when the Democrats were in charge.
This structuring of the data still shows a secular rise in the amount of inflation-adjusted per capita federal spending.
But in the Clinton administration, the average level of such spending was 1.7 percent higher when Democrats controlled Congress than after the Republican takeover in 1994.
This pattern repeated with a vengeance under the Bush administration: average annual spending was 7.9 percent higher during the last two years that Democrats controlled Congress compared to the six preceding years in which Republicans had voting majorities in both chambers.[3] Under President Obama, average spending in his first two years was 3.3 percent higher than when Republicans took over the House following the election sweep of 2010.”

card802
card802

2006

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. government can’t pay its own bills. … I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

2014

“Now, this debt ceiling — I just want to remind people in case you haven’t been keeping up — raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy. All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you’ve already racked up, Congress. It’s a basic function of making sure that the full faith and credit of the United States is preserved.”

“It’s always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we’re running up our debt, so people don’t like to vote on it, and, typically, there’s some gamesmanship in terms of making the President’s party shoulder the burden of raising the — taking the vote.”

Talking out both sides of his lying mouth, but he was correct in 2006. How fucking stupid does he think the average person is?

Raising the debt ceiling is proof that increasing the debt limit does, in fact, lead to increased spending, which is more debt added to the average person.

Discover more from The Burning Platform

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading