Balancing the Federal Budget: The Time for Tough Decisions Is Now (a Letter to So-Called Fiscal Conservatives)

This is a letter to the so-called fiscal conservatives who believe that we can balance our federal budget by simply cutting funding to all the "unnecessary" expenses like Planned Parenthood, the National Endowment for the Arts, NPR, and Education.

But first, an apology. I have been accused of not caring about the elderly and the disabled. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to give the impression that I support mass murder through tax reform. I don't, as a matter of fact. I support Social Security and Medicare reform - this does not mean I support kicking out the poor and the elderly and expecting them to die on the streets.

You, however, seem to think I am the kind of person who would save money on car insurance by selling unwanted family members to the glue factory. (Actually, I would call Geico.) Strangely, I like my parents and grandparents. They took care of me back in the days when I thought Bisquick was a kind of sandbox-in-a-box for the kitchen floor. They still send me nice presents for my birthday and at Christmas, which I don't understand, given that my love for self-rising pancake dough lasted until I was twelve. But I suppose I have some obligation to take care of them as they get older. (As for when they return to that age when Bisquick is a kind of sandbox-in-a-box for the kitchen floor...I try not to think about it...)

(btw, I lied. I would never call Geico. I am an Army veteran. I served in the 82^nd Airborne. I save way more money on my car insurance with USAA.)

Yet despite my ignorant nostalgia for aging family members, I do recognize the economic value of mass murder. Yes, if we really wanted to save the country lots of money, we could go ahead and simply shoot everyone who's unemployed and/or over 65. In my personal experience, purchasing bullets online (with free shipping, natch) has always been much easier (and far more fun) than balancing a checkbook. And at wholesale prices, a .22-caliber bullet is a heck of a lot cheaper than mailing a check. (Act Now! These Low Prices Won't Last Long!)

Fortunately, that's not the America we live in. I'm not about to let retired Americans (Americans who spent their lives contributing to Social Security, a.k.a. my grandparents...oh, and pretty soon my parents, too...) die penniless in the streets - I'll shoot the politicians myself if it comes to that. But since our politicians (with a few exceptions) are too gutless to sit down with a calculator and some cajones, people will eventually die penniless on the streets. Don't worry - they'll still get their checks in the mail - they just won't be worth much. There simply won't be enough money to go around, and the money that's left will be going through some wonderful inflation. And as we're running short on money, we'll still be stuck with that age-old question: "Should we default on our Treasury Bonds to China so we can Pay Our Soldiers?"

(Note to self and others: it's always good to pay the people with the guns. They are loyal and patriotic people, yes, but they still have to buy groceries. And diapers. That's right - don't mess with someone who has an M-16 in one hand and a bag of Huggies in the other.)

If you believe we can reform our nation's finances without reforming Social Security and Medicare, then you are not a fiscal conservative. A true fiscal conservative would sit down with a calculator and realize that cutting programs like Planned Parenthood, the NEA, NPR, and Education would not end the budget shortfall. Sure, it might help numerically - but we still wouldn't have enough revenue to pay our soldiers. And never mind the fact that the number of women with STD's would rise alongside the number of abandoned babies. Meanwhile, the artists would starve and the teachers would quit and the kids would be even dumber than they are now (eben dummerer? no way!??!)

It is impossible to balance our budget unless we address Social Security and Medicare. I mean, sure, you can try - but you'd have to raise taxes on everyone, and we know how likely that's gonna be.

People are afraid to tinker with Social Security. Some demand that the government "not touch" those checks. Well, here's the deal: we can save money now in ways that will improve lives down the road. For starters, we can raise the retirement age for healthy, employable Americans. And this makes sense - today, more people live longer than ever before. Just take a look at the Social Security Life Expectancy Tables. And since we know that people are living longer, we should help them live better, too. We can initiate cost-saving preventative medicine for the elderly and disabled. I'd be willing to bet that fitness classes are a heck of a lot cheaper than that magical trio of obesity/hypertension/antidepressant medications. (Ever been obese? With hypertension? And you're too freakin' old to walk up the steps to your own house? You get freakin' depressed.) I honestly think we should look to the private sector for some real solutions - something along the lines of "Save Money, Live Better."

As for health care, should I mention the death panel we had for my uncle? The one we held because he was dying from pancreatic cancer? I mean, the death panel that came after the surgeons cut out his pancreas? Along with parts of his liver and intestines? You know, the panel we convened after the oncologists irradiated him? The one that came less than a year after the "Chemo so Good" it was "Better than Jenny Craig"? Yeah, after all that, the cancer came back. (Stupid cancer - why don't you die already?!?)

Yep, after that we pretty much death-paneled him. A little bit of morphine, a few nice pillows because his back hurt - I mean, a gun woulda been cheaper and less painful, but it's so damn messy trying roll a man out back in a wheelchair just so you can shoot him. I mean, sure, the doctors could have offered another round of surgery/radiation/chemo (why, yes, we can remove what's left of your liver...oh, and we see that you still have some spleen...)

I'm sorry, but my uncle was actually brave enough to look reality in the face and say "not this time." That's a lot more than I can say for our politicians. Because they're too gutless to save money by actually REFORMING our budget (I'm guessing they don't know the number for Geico, either), they're going to gut some of our most important cultural and economic initiatives. But that's all right, I understand. Documenting reality and supporting foreign allies just isn't important during this difficult economic times.

Ever heard of Operation Homecoming? The one writing project which sought to capture the actual voices of tens of thousands of service members serving in Iraq and Afghanistan? That was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts.

Oh, and what about Roxanna Saberi, the American journalist who was jailed in Iran? She reported for the NPR affiliates there, doing little things like interviewing Iranians, finding out their opinions on the world. Pretty gutsy, don't you think? Considering how dangerous Iran is, I'd like to know the situation there BEFORE Ahmadinejad decides to attack our troops in Iraq. Tell me, does Rush Limbaugh have reporters who are willing to risk a trip to Tehran? (go ahead, type "rush limbaugh news reporters in iran" into Google. You'll be amazed at what comes up. I saw Obama, ABC, CNN, Fox, Roxanna Saberi [her again??] and some references to Iran and Rush Limbaugh, but no reference to Rush Limbaugh or his reporters actually reporting from Iran.)

Oh, I know, maybe El Rushbo would rather make the trip himself? I'd be happy to join him if he does. I will renew my passport and buy him the plane ticket to see that happen. Seriously - I want to know if Rush Limbaugh has the same kind of guts that we see in NPR journalists every day.

(Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me, NPR is the news radio organization that draws 26% of its funding from corporate sponsors, 14% from universities, and only 11.6% from federal sources? Where's the rest of the money come from? Their own listeners? Through their annual on-air fund drives? Holy Crap! They have listeners?!?)

And here's another good one - do you know who decided to provide military equipment and foreign aid to South America while we were busy invading Iraq? That's right - China! (Oh, look, the Americans are busy...let's go purchase Columbia and Mexico! No, we don't have carrier battle groups, but we have lots of submarines with anti-aircraft-carrier torpedoes! And enough money to buy the lower half of the Western Hemisphere! Okay, maybe not that much money, but we do have $900 Billion in U.S. Treasury Bonds!!)

So yes, we really should cut off all that foreign aid we send to needy countries, show them just how much we really love them.

And before you talk about how we can "balance our budget" while ignoring Social Security and Medicare, go ahead and check out our 2010 Federal Budget. It's quite similar to our projected 2011 and 2012 budgets. You'll note that Defense Spending is listed as a "discretionary" expense (as opposed to "mandatory" expenses like Social Security, Medicare, and Interest on the Debt.) And oh, look, we didn't bring in enough revenue to cover the the Department of Defense. The hell with the Park Service and NPR and NASA and Education and all the other Stupid Discretionary Things that are lumped in with "All Other Departments and Agencies Which Are Not the DoD" - the day we run out of money to pay our troops and buy new planes because every last penny is being handed out to the unemployed and retired, we're pretty much screwed anyway.

I mean, hell, at that point we may as well call ourselves socialists - all we'll be doing is taking in cash from the taxpayers so we can dole it out to those who don't have enough to pay taxes. That is the definition of socialism, isn't it? Taking from those who have in order to feed those who don't? At that point, it really won't matter that the richest 1% of Americans are currently paying around 38% of our tax revenues.  They cover most of what the IRS takes in.  They probably shouldn't pay more than that, though I'm willing to withhold judgment for now.

Honestly, I'm not what scares me more - the fact that the top 1% of American earners pay nearly 40% of our taxes, or that I've become a convert to Reaganomics...

Given the current management of our federal budget, all them rich folks will be screwed just like the rest of us.  So go ahead, extend the Bush tax cuts - what's a hundred billion in tax cuts when you're spurting $1.26 trillion in deficits from your fiscal aorta?  (http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/deficit.htm and http://useconomy.about.com/od/fiscalpolicy/p/deficit.htm)