QUESTIONS

The big question is still the same today and it will be the same in November.  Do we get our national finances under control by reducing spending or by increasing taxes.  There are a myriad of related questions.  "What about a combination of the two?"  or "What about a change in the tax code to eliminate special interest group deductions?"  or "What about changing the way we tax?"  Sure, all of these are possible but they will not solve the underlying problem.  Make any cost-cutting suggestion at all and you get demonized.  Reduce give-aways like social security or medicare and you are correcting the problem on the backs of senior citizens.  Reduce welfare give-aways like food stamps or aid to dependent children and you are correcting the problem on the backs of women and children.  Reduce public worker pensions and you are correcting the problem on the backs of policemen, firemen, and teachers. 

Until the size of government is reduced and restrictions put on its growth, we will flounder in the same miserable situation we're in now.  We have to make it clear that there is a difference between a government that provides a safety net and one that provides everything.  The definition of this government is a real trick.  The application of it, I fear, is impossible.  When we vote, we elect a person to the most powerful position in the world.  Do we expect that person to reduce his own power?  Do we expect that person to reduce the power of the government he heads?  It will take a special person to do that.  He either hasn't been born yet or was born 2012 years ago.

:-)