Ms. Brooks”s commentary on April 13 in the Lake County Record-Bee seems to me to be a great example of the smoke and mirrors too many politicians and political wannabees use to stir up people without saying anything specific or of substance.
She bills herself as an advocate for everyday Americans concerned about the loss of their liberty from big government, but she doesn”t bother to define everyday Americans, what “liberties” and what defines “big” government.
She does refer to “chronic fiscal irresponsibility” as a major culprit, but doesn”t bother to describe what she considers “irresponsibility.” I”d really like to have her compare fiscal responsibility during the years 1992-2000 with those of 2001-2009.
I agree with her that deliberately taking the country down the economic tubes is bad, but we are there and it is time to consider the fact that when one is in a hole, one should stop digging.
Her line, “we are taxed enough already” is great-grandstanding, but it is simply not true, except for her far right ideology. Americans are not taxed enough if we are to get out of the hole. A total tax of 18 percent GDP is not enough to do what the people over the years have decided they want. Factually, it is maybe two-thirds of the average developed country.
She likes business, but does not want see the country operate as business does. Business first starts out to define its mission, what are we trying to do? And if we can”t do everything, set priorities.
Next business estimates the cost to deliver the services/products that have been chosen by priority plus a little something to make the effort worthwhile. Then a price for the product is set, and if the buyers want the product they will pay.
Ms. Brooks seems to think that the country should accept what income it gets and spend only that much. Neither rational nor possible because of long-term commitments. She advocates another irrational view. Equating spending to income may eventually do away with deficits, but does nothing to reduce the national debt. Only a surplus will do that and she, by definition is against that.
She claims that California has the second highest “tax index” and that the states lower in the index have lower taxes and are therefore more prosperous. Probably a point of definition. But how many of us would consider leaving California”s lifestyle for some garden spot like West Virginia or New Jersey?
She speaks of how long workers must work until they have paid their years” contribution to Social Security, for example.
In my life I don”t think for an instant that I could by myself match what Social Security and Medicare afford me. But I do think that one measure of her “irresponsibility” charge is valid. In no way have the working people been asked to pay what they should have given, increased life lengths and the magical medical inventions that simply did not exist when Medicare was initiated. Some, true, but not nearly enough.
Until we learn to set priorities on who gets what and look aside when people die from lack of food or medical care, we need a lot more taxes.
We need to do what Ms. Brooks doesn”t want to do: Carefully identify needed expenditures and reduce defense levels to what we need.
She ends her commentary with “… demand that our government spend only what it receives, pay down the debt and save for the liabilities it promised.”
Eventually this will happen in both state and country, but it is going to hurt and not be through the ways she would like. Even then lowering the national debt is not too likely to be affected. After 10 years of fiscal irresponsibility we have an awful lot of pain to bear.
Guthrie “Guff” Worth
Lakeport
