Due to the ridicules amount of debt our nation has, Congress passed a pay-as-you-go budgeting system in 2007. This rule, also known as "paygo," requires that nay tax cuts or increases in entitlement spending be offest with spending reductions elsewhere.
Proponents say it is a good measure to limit deficits and show that Congress knows that too. They also say that it will hold Congress to the standards that most business and families already apply to, where you can't spend what you don't have. The final argument for paygo is that it can be suspended if needed, such as in a time of crisis. Opponents to paygo claim that it will only cause higher taxes for new programs that will hurt the economy. They believe that the national debt should be reduced by economic growth rather than budget cuts or tax hikes. They also believe that in case of emergency, paygo will hinder Congress' response and action.
Although paygo sounds like a good idea theoretically, it doesn't quite work that well in the real world. Sometimes in order to get out of debt you have to get more into debt first. Sure we are already trillions into debt, but now we have to really try to get out, and paygo will only keep us on the downward spiral. The solution is in economic growth and research to spur forward momentum in our economy. Paygo would make major reforms like Social Security Privatization a non-starter. You have to remember that that budget deficits, particularly the ones we're running now at low rates of interest, are not the problem. They aren't because with dollars being fungible, it doesn't matter where the dollars come from. Government spending is government spending. That is why I'm opposed to the "paygo" plan.
Supporting article from John Tamny - http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/03/paygo-congress-budget-reform-opinions-columnists-obama-social-security.html
War Dollars - by John Schwegel
Social Security - by Alexa Goetsch
Proponents say it is a good measure to limit deficits and show that Congress knows that too. They also say that it will hold Congress to the standards that most business and families already apply to, where you can't spend what you don't have. The final argument for paygo is that it can be suspended if needed, such as in a time of crisis. Opponents to paygo claim that it will only cause higher taxes for new programs that will hurt the economy. They believe that the national debt should be reduced by economic growth rather than budget cuts or tax hikes. They also believe that in case of emergency, paygo will hinder Congress' response and action.
Although paygo sounds like a good idea theoretically, it doesn't quite work that well in the real world. Sometimes in order to get out of debt you have to get more into debt first. Sure we are already trillions into debt, but now we have to really try to get out, and paygo will only keep us on the downward spiral. The solution is in economic growth and research to spur forward momentum in our economy. Paygo would make major reforms like Social Security Privatization a non-starter. You have to remember that that budget deficits, particularly the ones we're running now at low rates of interest, are not the problem. They aren't because with dollars being fungible, it doesn't matter where the dollars come from. Government spending is government spending. That is why I'm opposed to the "paygo" plan.
Supporting article from John Tamny - http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/03/paygo-congress-budget-reform-opinions-columnists-obama-social-security.html
War Dollars - by John Schwegel
Social Security - by Alexa Goetsch
No comments:
Post a Comment