Showing posts with label bureaucracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bureaucracy. Show all posts

Thursday, May 8, 2014

Debt and the Federal Budget

     The following was written in April 2014, as part of a response to the Campaign for Liberty's 2012 survey questionnaire for candidates running for federal office.



14. Will you vote against any budget that increases our debt?

     Yes, I will vote against any and all proposed budgets that would increase the nation's debt, and in times when no annual budget is passed, I will also vote against large omnibus spending bills.
     The people of the United States do not need a federal government spending a quarter of the wealth produced in the nation annually. The 21% of GDP spent under the 2013 budget is an improvement over this, but more work has yet to be done. The costs of having a federal government would be cut immediately upon the adoption of a Balanced Budget Amendment, which two-thirds of the states now want for themselves.
     I will support efforts to pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and I will urge all states to do the same as soon as possible. I will seriously consider supporting any proposed Cut-Cap-and-Balance type legislation, although I will not support any such legislation which does not go far enough towards achieving balanced budgets.
     The federal government should close all remaining tax loopholes, and reduce spending. Proposed budgets in the near future will likely need to have $600 to $700 billion trimmed from them, and $1 trillion will likely need to be cut from the White House's requested spending total. Any surpluses resulting after such cuts should go first towards paying off foreign and public debt, and then towards tax decreases.
     The attitudes that we should or can increase government spending during a recession, or set spending at whatever level is necessary to fund worthwhile government programs, reflect a lack of principles about the proper role, size, and scope of government, and compound the risk that a lack of fiscal restraint will lead to unfunded liabilities, deficits, and debt.
     All of this is possible as long as the Department of Commerce, national defense (the single largest discretionary spending item), the Departments of Homeland Security and State and the intelligence programs; the medical entitlements; the Departments of Education, H.U.D., Justice, Energy, and Interior; the E.P.A., and the Departments of Transportation and Labor are considered the primary targets for spending cuts (in that order).
     This could be done without cutting Social Security, and even without completely abolishing any federal department besides the Department of Commerce. However, I believe that no progress on taxation can be made unless and until the federal government cedes all of its land back to the states and the people therein, so that states may fully tax the unimproved value of that land, instead of taxing (and effectively discouraging) productivity occurring on the land, such as sales and income earnings.




For more entries on budgets, finance, debt, and the bailouts, please visit:

Sunday, April 20, 2014

Viewing Legislation Through the Economic Lens

Written November 19th, 2010


   We must view all political issues as inherently economic in nature. Besides asking if a bill is constitutional, we must also ask how we will fund it and whether the methods and means by which we fund it are also constitutional. Besides requiring all future bills to cite in them the specific clauses which explicitly grant the congress the authority to pass such laws, I would support a federal balanced-budget amendment, which would prevent deficits and debt increases, requiring the government to either cut spending, raise taxes, borrow more, and / or print more money (the latter only as a last resort, however!).

   In that all political issues are inherently economic in nature, we must view government itself through the lens of economics. Government apparati are little other than contract-enforcement agencies; organizations which provide us security and justice for a fee, obligated to hold up their end of the bargain. The federal government behaves as a corporation that desires to become a monopoly. It sees states, local communities, and private security firms, and offers them legitimacy if only they will consent to take orders from, and become integrated into, the overarching, monolithic centralized power.

   The federal government is not at the top of the power structure. The people are. Just as the states can take back the powers which they have vested in the federal government, the people can take back the powers which they have vested in the state governments, and therefore the people can compel the states and congress to reclaim for they the people the powers which states and the congress have vested in the executive branch and in the president, especially those powers illegitimately and wrongfully appropriated to those who hold such positions.




For more entries on budgets, finance, debt, and the bailouts, please visit:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/debt-and-federal-budget.html

For more entries on taxation, please visit:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/05/tax-cuts.html

For more entries on theory of government, please visit:

Links to Documentaries About Covid-19, Vaccine Hesitancy, A.Z.T., and Terrain Theory vs. Germ Theory

      Below is a list of links to documentaries regarding various topics related to Covid-19.      Topics addressed in these documentaries i...