McCainomics: The Right Reacts

Back to Economics...

Let's talk economics instead of politics. Social welfare programs are economically inefficient. The only way to really make them financially sound is for a government to have a high tax rate across the board - not just on one socioeconomic class. A great example of a feasible way for a government to provide such programs is the Netherlands - they are able to provide wonderful social programs, paid for by a universally high rate of taxation.

Let's be honest, though - this is not a feasible solution for the United States. Americans by and large are unwilling to part with the high percentage of taxes required to fund the programs that they insist they are owed by the government. The real problem here is the sense of entitlement that American's have come to embrace. Our national debt is so high because we as citizens vote for programs and policies which we will not support with our tax dollars. Instead, those who wish to benefit from those programs and policies believe that someone else should pay for it, i.e. those who benefit from the Bush tax cuts.

What we're seeing, then, is a fundamental shift in the values of our society - and not for the better. What was once the "Land of Opportunity," i.e. the land where hard work and financial responsibility paid off, has become the "Land of What's in it for Me." We may not yet know the details of McCain's policy - which may or may not be the solution - but what he has described so far is much more on point than anything we've seen from either Obama or Hillary. Instead of looking to create additional, and much more expensive programs (like universal healthcare), he is being realistic about the fact that we may have to eliminate programs for which Americans are unwilling to pay.

TDM of PA @ Apr 29, 2008 14:52:44 PM

Oh, please, yourself.

Your Ph.D. moniker may impress some, but not me. If you're so darn smart, why don't you add all the "earmarks" of the last seven years together and compare the total against the increase to the national debt of the last seven years. Go ahead. I dare you. The "earmarks" argument is WORTHLESS, because most of them are for things that citizens want and need. Nearly any infrastructure project in any congressional district is an "earmark" and you're not going to get rid of them by changing the way they are authorized and enacted.

Perhaps I just "don't know what I'm taling about" as you say, but you do. And YOU ARE CLEARLY LYING.

Daniel David of NM @ Apr 29, 2008 12:37:14 PM

Oh please

"Daniel David" clearly has no idea what he's talking about. Go troll another website and leve US News to handle the facts. McCain doesn't have to target "ALL" of his spending cuts at social programs; it's called getting rid of PORK BARREL spending at pet projects, like Obama's $740,000,000-worth of earmarks since 2005.

Mike Bradley, Ph. D. of NH @ Apr 28, 2008 20:07:59 PM