“Lots of other places—from Britain to Australia—took a hit in 1929 but, alas, they lacked an FDR to keep it going till the end of the Thirties. That’s why in other countries they refer to it as ‘the Depression,’ but only in the U.S. is it ‘Great’.” —Mark Steyn
If America's financial situation continues to worsen, what kind of policies will the next president enact to reverse it? Will he look to the example of FDR and increase the size of, and dependency on the federal government, or will he force the government to shrink in size and get out of the way of the people? Anyone who believes that our current financial troubles are the result of an under-regulated free market and not the malfeasance of our elected officials are seriously misguided in my opinion, but if they get their way in this election, they will act on their incorrect assessment and plunge the country into another deep, prolonged depression.
In difficult economic times, the appetites of the government must be curbed so that people can allocate their scarce resources as efficiently as possible, as they see fit based on their intimate and up to date understanding of their own circumstances, not at the whim of a bureaucrat. In times of plenty, the government's size has swelled enormously, resulting in the porcine behemoth we now have in Washington. As the real economy shrinks, it is imperative that the federal government do so as well. Unfortunately, when a politician sees the budget for one of his pet projects threatened because tax revenues are falling, he doesn't care much about why the money's no longer there, just that his precious program must be preserved at all costs, even if that means raising taxes. The true wealth of America is under assault from the government that is supposed to protect it, and unless our next president can convince Congress to reduce the size of government, it risks killing the goose that laid the golden egg.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment