Sequester Cuts
It is not only easy, but also necessary,
for politicians to demagogue and create a false emergency in order to spur on
their policies for political gain. They always seem to manufacture one
emergency after another as an excuse to either increase spending levels, or,
less desirable, keep those levels the same. Rahm Emanuel, in his position as
chief of staff to President Barrack Obama, famously once said, “Never allow a crisis to go to waste.” This, sadly,
seems to be the case with sequester. Austrian Economists believe that government spending does not lead to
economic growth, but instead stifles that growth.
Suzan
Davis writes about how sequester may have serious effects on a struggling
economy, in her article entitled, “Sequester: 'Collateral damage' of budget war
may be huge.” In her article, Davis
states that the sequester law might endanger economic growth, increase
unemployment, and hurt the United States military effectiveness. Larry Kudlow
in his article, “The Pro-Growth Sequester,” correctly points out that the
sequester law only makes up about one quarter of one percent of the nation’s GDP.
Davis points to the White House’s warnings of devastating
consequences and hundreds of thousands of federal employees being affected by
the draconian cuts. How can this be? Government does not use regular accounting
methods like most Americans, instead using base line budgeting, which
automatically includes increases to every department’s budget each year. Kudlow
states that “the sequester would slow the growth of spending. They're not real cuts in the level of spending.”
The classical definition of insanity
is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.
Throughout history, Keynesians state that to reduce unemployment the nation needs
to spend more money. The same argument is always used for recovering from a
recession. They purposely ignore that each time government has reduced spending
levels and forced the size of government to shrink, there has been a boom in
the private sector. It happened during the Coolidge, Reagan, and Clinton
administrations.
For anyone to state that if
government reduces it’s spending and adopts austerity measures the economy will
tank is a baseless argument without any concrete facts to support their
argument. Friedrich V. Hayek once said that, “Emergencies have always been the pretext on which the
safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.” That statement held true
then and it does today. For politicians to create emergencies as a pretense to gather
more power is an abuse of the offices they hold and should be exposed for the
charlatans that they are.
No comments:
Post a Comment