 |
| 1960 Chevy Impala-One Sweet Ride |
One piece of false propaganda that seems to permeate the current federal budget talks is that programs cannot be cut because they have existed forever. This view is spread by liberals and
In 1960, the federal budget was about $92 Billion. In 2010, the federal government spent about $3.46 Trillion. Let's look at that.
conservatives alike. Agency web sites give false histories that make them seem much older than they truly are. The Department of Health and Human Services, established in 1980, tells its history as beginning in 1798 with "Passage of an act for the relief of sick and disabled seamen." This false statement of antiquity is used to make the department seem more vital and indispensable. In fact, many programs and cabinet level departments did not exist 50 years ago. Although 50 years may seem like long ago, given that the United States is over 200 years old, it's really not that long ago and definitely not forever.
In 1960, the federal budget was about $92 Billion. In 2010, the federal government spent about $3.46 Trillion. Let's look at that.
1960 $92,000,000,000
2010 $3,460,000,000,000
That is a lot more money!! More than $3.3 trillion more!!
The proposed 2012 budget for the Department of Transportation, established 1966, is larger than the ENTIRE federal budget in 1960. Some programs that didn't exist in 1960 include Public Broadcasting, Medicare, Head Start, the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities, Food Stamps and the DEA. Some of the cabinet level departments that didn't exist are the Departments of Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and Housing and Urban Development. Just cutting these historically new departments will save about $1.2 Trillion from the 2012 budget.
The proposed 2012 budget for the Department of Transportation, established 1966, is larger than the ENTIRE federal budget in 1960. Some programs that didn't exist in 1960 include Public Broadcasting, Medicare, Head Start, the National Endowments for the Arts and Humanities, Food Stamps and the DEA. Some of the cabinet level departments that didn't exist are the Departments of Transportation, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and Housing and Urban Development. Just cutting these historically new departments will save about $1.2 Trillion from the 2012 budget.
Was the United States really that bad of place in 1960? I don't think so. We should remember the "Good Old Days" and dig into all of these new programs. There are questions that should be asked. Did a permanent problem exist? Does this program solve that problem? Does this program not cause any other problems that are worse than the problem the program solves? Is this program constitutional? If the answers to all these questions are not a resounding yes, we should abolish the program.
Remember that almost every program that the politicians say is "sacred" is relatively new when looking at the history of the United States. Many have not been in existence for 50 years and a lot of programs didn't even exist when you were young. Life wasn't all that bad then and most government programs don't make things better now. Remember the "good old days" and educate the Liberals who say,"It's been this way forever."
Remember that almost every program that the politicians say is "sacred" is relatively new when looking at the history of the United States. Many have not been in existence for 50 years and a lot of programs didn't even exist when you were young. Life wasn't all that bad then and most government programs don't make things better now. Remember the "good old days" and educate the Liberals who say,"It's been this way forever."
shows that some said Johnson and Kwak's explanation was too complicated and some said it was too simple. That makes me think it was just right. I never quite understood credit default swaps and collateralized debt obligations from reading the popular.press. This book seemed to make it clear. The only objection is that they overemphasized the effects of deregulation on the markets and did not talk enough about government programs designed to give loans to people who couldn't afford houses contributed to bank insolvency.
