Andrew Sullivan calls out the George Bush administration for hiding the real size of future budget deficits through over-optimistic revenue assumptions and omitting the cost of overhauling Social Security.
When it comes to government spending, Bush just doesn't get it. If Bush was committed to lowering government spending, he'd want to make future budget deficits appear bigger, not smaller. Because projections of huge future deficits would spur Congress to action.
1 comment:
What are you, 12 years old? If everything is owned, why on earth would you presume that you would be an owner? Do the words "Bill Gates" mean anything to you? Because you would be working for him in a libertarian world (ie, he would own everything and you would have to earn the use of space and materials). What a stupid fucking idea!
As for Ben Franklin, he admits freely the random nature of success and its doubtful connection to merit, which you glibly ignore. If hard work guarantees wealth and happiness, why are the hardest working Americans not the wealthiest? This is a really simple question. Perhaps you ought to think about what comes from your mouth (and keyboard). Do you aver, then, that GW Bush is the smartest, hardest-working person around, simply because of his success? Clearly, you do not. Thus, you need to explain this inconsistency before moving on. Are people who sit behind desks "hardworking"? Is the shepherding of money truly "work"? What, exactly, do you mean? Or, like most self-described libertarians, are you just a shallow narcissist, bent on being different, contrary, and ignorant?
Post a Comment