Thank goodness most Arkansans get it. Except for a few that lean so far to the left they walk at a 45 degree angle, most of us believe in sound economic principles. Most of us think budgets should be balanced, people should be paid more if they produce more and that growth in government spending and power is dangerous.
Proof of this conservative approach can be found across our great state in various ways. Probably the best evidence is the almost complete rejection of Obama and his policies both in the 2008 and 2012 elections. As I previously commented, our current president is the most corrupt and dangerous administration in the last 150 years.
Corrupt and dangerous refers to the long term damage to the United States of America. As some might argue our president has not been impeached like Clinton and there is no record of speeding tickets or armed robbery, therefore he is innocent.
If you have some doubt about where you stand on some basic economic principles, take this little test and answer these five questions:
1. Do you believe the ideal situation in society would be for all people to have an equal amount of wealth?
2. Do you believe our economy is a zero sum game which means if someone gets
more, someone else gets less?
3. Would you agree the main function of the Federal Government is to make certain all citizens have equal opportunity?
4. If you get a raise for good performance when 20 other workers in your same company don’t, would you feel guilty?
5. Do you really believe food stamps and other government goodies are good for the economy because that money will be spent almost immediately on goods and services?
If you even hesitate before answering no for any of these five questions, you might not understand our capitalistic system or you might believe certain socialistic principles just might be okay.
The growth of our federal government both fiscally and power-wise is absolutely stunning. Our friends across the pond are learning what happens when government spending destroys the pillars of sound economic principles. Some European countries are experiencing a 25 percent decrease in compensation of government workers. This is after laying off 10 to 20 percent of government employees. Protests are nice but these Europeans are learning protests don’t change economic facts.
Page 2 of 2 - The growth of government in this country is absolutely breath taking. This growth has happened under both Republican and Democrat administrations, but has taken off like a rocket under Obama. Here is something to consider. There are more federal workers today than the total population in each of 24 states. And this is before we hire thousands and thousands of IRS workers, facilitators, exchange workers and hangers on to administer the grand folly – Obamacare.
Paul Krugman, the ultra-left columnist of the New York Times and other misinformed copycats, are now on a mission to inform us there is no problem with our national debt because our deficit is coming down.
Here’s the trick he is using and evidently believes you and I will swallow it all. After 3 or 4 years of deficits exceeding one trillion dollars, we may now experience a year that is under 1 trillion dollars, therefore all is good.
Paul Krugman’s perennial solution is this country should do more deficit spending not less. If you listen to him, the reason why Obama’s one trillion stimulus program didn’t work is because it wasn’t enough. As Krugman puts it we should have spent 2 or 3 trillion more.
And then there’s the games Krugman and even a Sun Times columnist plays. If you can’t support the ungodly debts of 17 trillion, start messing around with percentages. As an example, they claim the deficit has decreased percentage-wise more under Obama than certain Republican presidents – well, duh! If you have an Obama-like 1.5 trillion deficit and you decrease it to one trillion (still a tremendous deficit) that’s a big percentage decrease.
Another way to play with numbers that even a six grader can debunk is to ignore the absolute amount of debt and concentrate only on percentages when making comparisons. To illustrate: if president (A) increases the deficit to two trillion dollars from a base of one trillion, that’s 100 percent. If president (B) increases the debt by five trillion from a base of 10 trillion, he is doing a better job because his increase is only 50 percent. Don’t you think having a deficit of 5 trillion might be more damaging than a deficit of 1 trillion?
(Jerry Jackson of Heber Springs writes his “conservative viewpoint” column each week)