Debt debate unrealistic

A significant segment of Congress proposes spending cuts and less financial oversight as the only solutions to the deficit. We are in our condition after years of lower taxes and more years during which financial oversight was loosened.

Many of this group further suggested the U.S. could meet its debt obligations without raising the debt ceiling. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office indicated next year’s budget would have to be cut 34 percent to achieve this. Scenarios involving the top three budget items suggest the scale of such cuts. Cutting defense, Medicare and Social Security each in half would cut only about 27 percent. The moral and economic implications of such cuts are staggering.

There is the constant refrain that the stimulus didn’t work. The CBO estimates there would be between 1.4 million and 3.3 million fewer jobs without the stimulus. Not enough, but better than none.

Also heard is all taxes are “job killing,” without historical evidence. Doesn’t all this suggest infrastructure stimulus, financial system oversight, spending cuts and revenue enhancement through tax reform are worthy of consideration?

The deficit needs addressing. Might we get beyond sound bites and demand that the implications of simple proposed solutions be thoroughly presented?

Greg Linwick

Veradale