There are essentially two parties in Congress today. One is the liberal-socialist Democrat-Republican party. These consist of all Democrats plus most of the Senate Republicans, leaving aside the Tea Party Republican Senators elected in 2010. The second party consists of the Tea Party Republicans who dominate the House of Representatives. The good news is that the USA is getting somewhere, in that we’re in the process of forming a second party. But much of the Republican Party, especially in the Senate, is populated by people who really don’t have a problem with Big Government as we know it. These are the members of the party who still have to go.
If we had a real second party in both houses of Congress, it would be even harder for Obama to get away with his claim that the “reasonable”
thing to do is both raise taxes and cut spending. You can be sure that Obama has no intention of cutting spending. Government always has, and always will, find ways to restore cuts and turn spending reductions into spending increases. There’s no incentive for government to do otherwise, so long as most members of Congress, in addition to the President, believe in socialism. The only way to cut spending is to put a limit on government. This is what the House Republicans are at least attempting to do through their “cut, cap and balance” proposal. They’re trying to tell Americans, “Government shouldn’t be doing all these things. The only way to stop government from doing these things is to tie its hands.” And this is precisely why not only Obama, but also most Republican Senators, cannot stand the proposal. They don’t want to restrain government. They want to leave it largely as it is (in the case of Republicans), or massively expand it, forever (in the case of Obama and most Democrats).
If you believe, as most Republicans and all Democrats do, that the best things which happen in the world are due to government, then the last thing you want to do is restrain government power. Balanced budgets don’t matter to the apostles of Big Government, because government must be the last thing to fall, according to them.
Obama, Geithner, and wobbly Republicans all talk of the impending disasters to ensue if the debt limit isn’t increased. But what about the impending disaster we’re facing whether the debt limit is increased, or not? We’re led to believe that the economy is relatively stable, so long as the evil Tea Party Republicans don’t get their way and prevent these stalwarts of the economy from doing their tired thing. Never mind that these stalwarts of the economy are simply doing what they always have:
Increasing the deficit, increasing taxes, inflating the currency (and in the process devaluing everything you own), and calling it economic progress. This could never have gone on forever, and it’s remarkable it has gone on as long as it has.
The bulk of the media, the Democratic Party and the Republicans in the Senate would have us believe that everything is fundamentally OK — so long as government keeps going. The only difference between the Democrats and these Republicans is that the Republicans don’t like increasing taxes, while the Democrats do. Taxes are going up anyway, unless the Tea Party Republicans in the House (and a few in the Senate) continue to refuse to budge. It’s remarkable they have held firm this time, and if history is any guide they will eventually buckle. I’m not certain they will buckle, but even if they don’t, I also recognize they will get the blame for the disaster that was actually created by government — not by the Tea Party. The Tea Party is nothing more than the messenger.
Notice how all the pressure is on the Tea Party wing of the Republican Party to compromise. Little or no pressure is put on the other side. Why aren’t the advocates of tax increases put on the defensive? Why aren’t they pressured, by Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner or others, to defend their case for refusing to cut spending more than being proposed? If the government cannot afford to go on like it is, then maybe it should stop pretending that it can. Why is that case never made? Where in the Constitution is the requirement of government to tell the people only what they want to hear, even when facts overwhelmingly refute it?
The current crisis is, at its fiscal root, being created by the failure of the private economy to grow. Government has not become less greedy, but the private economy has become less productive. Unemployment is going up and we’re barely, if at all, out of the years-long recession that began in 2007-2008. Government, as represented by the precious welfare state of Democrats and establishment Republicans, has a massive conflict of interest. It needs people to be dependent on their entitlement, welfare, health care and unemployment programs. Without this dependency, government cannot continue to thrive and grow in its power and influence. Yet as government eats up more and more of the private economy in order to pay for this entrenched dependence, the private economy inevitably must suffer. This is a vicious cycle which will only worsen with time, as the economy continues to stagnate or decline, and demand for government handouts (by even the middle class) increases.
Liberals, socialists and moderate Republicans claim that the only answer is to raise taxes on the half of the population who still pay taxes. How far will they take this — to eventually, say, a 100 percent tax rate?
Even that won’t pay the bills of a greedy, always starving redistributive state. Will half the population become full-time slaves to the other half of the population who either chooses not to work, or cannot work because the government will not allow the private economy to grow?
This is beyond madness. This is denial and evasion on a scale never before seen in human history. In a way it’s not surprising, because the USA was the greatest economy in history. It had the most to lose, and (absent a massive course reversal) it will fall the hardest, with a painful “thud” the world has never before seen. And none of it will be the Tea Party’s fault.