Once again, for the third year in a row, deficit hawks from the current administration, the ones who are preaching fiscal responsibility, have a message for us: deficits don't matter.
I've only been keeping track for about 30 years now, but year after year presidents come out with an annual budget and proclaim that they are on track to balance the budget within the foreseeable future and offer deficit upon record deficit for the current year. Democrats and Republicans alike want us to believe that they are reducing federal spending but only do so under the definition that defines reduction as a decrease in the rate of increase.
President Obama can no longer pass the blame on former President Bush for the fiscal mess that we are continuing. These are his budgets now. Yet President Obama has promised the American people that he would get deficits under control. It looks like his method of getting things under control is to quadruple the annual deficit and then after a few years to see if it can be cut in half. Therefore, after four years, the annual deficit will still be double of what it was to begin with, yet he can claim victory for keeping things under control. Does this make sense to anyone? Perhaps only if a progressive could explain it to me.
But apparently deficits don't matter. 30 years ago when we crossed the $1 trillion mark for national debt, we thought that was way too much and had to stop. Several years ago, we crossed the $10 trillion mark for national debt and continued to spend like deficits did not matter. Every few years, we were doubling our national debt. We are still on the fast track to doubling our national debt again. In the Obama administration alone, we will have added $5 trillion to the national debt. It used to raise eyebrows and start political arguments. Until it comes time to do something about it. Then it's business as usual.
President Obama even commissioned a debt commission to assess the situation and make recommendations on what we need to do. Well, they did just that if the administration decided to ignore all of the recommendations. The expanded programs and the enlargement of the federal government is much too dear to the current administration to even slow down the rate of increases. Any reduction in the rate of increases will be due to taxes that are being snuck into the budget and hopefully passed without much notice. The administration will be picking winners and losers for the upcoming fiscal year. Losers will be those people who still use fossil fuels. The winners will be people who will be manufacturing and coming up with impractical uses for the so-called green economy that supposedly we are heading towards. But are we? Can we? Is this the decade that we moved to a green economy? Again, I remember about 30 years ago when the 80s was going to be the decade that we moved to the metric system.