Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

We are also to blame for the deficit

February 25, 2013

It’s easy to point the finger at elected officials, especially those in Congress, for the huge debt and unprecedented deficit spending draining our treasury....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(54)

rdnewt

Feb-25-13 6:27 AM

I have to say, Paul, that I have to agree with you on this one. Good write up.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

judeye

Feb-25-13 7:17 AM

Just to point out..."In the past three years the deficit has fallen faster than any time since the demolization from WWII....From 2009 to 2012 the deficit shrank 3.1% going from 10.1% to 7% of GDP" INVESTORS dot COM The article goes on to make a case that yes we are spending more..and at the same time our REVENUES are at an all time low (well almost as low as just before the great depression)

Point..we need BOTH. Reduce spending AND INCREASE REVENUES. Why is this so difficult for some to realize?

I agree with many of the grants a "pork". However, many grants are meant to address one specific problem or act as 'seed' money to help start a program. Not all grants are equal. I just wonder if the grant Gowanda received to improve walking in the city, will save money if the kids then walk to school. How much would Dunkirk or Fredonia save if more kids walked to school?

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bulldog10

Feb-25-13 7:43 AM

Once you start programs like grants or give-aways its hard to end them. It would be nice to know what income and property taxes would be like without grants and gifts.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Feb-25-13 8:23 AM

You went straight to the root of the matter. One entity's "grant" is another entity's "wasteful spending".

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Malinda

Feb-25-13 8:35 AM

Once again, Mr. Christopher is right on target. I was just involved with a school merger commitee and it really was upsetting to constantly hear the mediators focus on the money. Most of the talk was "do it while you can get the incentive money." and "it's free money." Well, last I checked, it absolutely IS NOT "free" money. Taxpayers are footing the bill. Whether it's state or federal, TAXPAYERS are supplying the money. Someday I hope to run into Mr. Christopher on the street so I can introduce myself and shake his hand. I'm always glad to see his commentary in the paper. Not many people have the guts to say right out what is clear as day. I, myself, am often rejected for speaking the truth. Not many people want to hear it.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Feb-25-13 9:06 AM

The libs are at it again as Paul insults again. Public schools our fault , huh ? paul you do know schools are controlled by the democrats and their minions, the teachers union, right ? In NY , the teachers have filed suit to eliminate the 2% tax cap.Public employees want their pork, gravy etc and are willing to bankrupt the govt and taxpayers to get it. Oh, but Paul loves unions ! Nice going Paul,. School choice is fought again and again. The unions want the control and to make more dumbocrats. Judeye, if the rich gave all their money to the govt it would be used up in short order. can you understand that at all ? i dont think so !The libs,in mass conversion disorder, instead of twitching, all they want is your money .

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

FredoniaFred

Feb-25-13 9:11 AM

Those like Judeye that think we are doing great keep pointing to an alleged reduction in the deficit. The deficit is the amount that we spend that is more than we have. A reduction in the deficit is still spending more than we have.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Feb-25-13 9:17 AM

We hear the term so often "don't worry, it's not local money and if we don't take it someone else will". The fundamental problem is that government has no respect for the taxpayer. Elected officials don't have to earn the money, they don't have to worry about re-election, so why should they care how the money is spent? Government has been corrupted by money and special interests and as President Reagan said "government has become too big, too expensive and too intrusive in our lives". Perhaps the best example is the current debate over sequester. It is a law that requires government to reduce spending by less than 3%. Our government has more fat than Porky Pig and they are worried about a 3% spending reduction! We are now engaged in a campaign of fear where our leaders will try to convince the taxpaying public that the federal government could never provide essential services with a 3% spending reduction. Wouldn't it be nice if we could get a 3% reduction in propag

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Feb-25-13 9:20 AM

(con't) a 3% reduction in propaganda, rhetoric and government lies?

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hadenough

Feb-25-13 10:03 AM

Oh please the money we get from the government is chump change. We did not continue funding the wars, we did not give billions to Solindra who BTW went bankrupt. No it is our politicians the ones in Washington getting $175,000 a year to do nothing. We did not vote to give away billions to countries that hate us. Last I checkes Congress has to approve any spending of monies. They have not stood up to the president and said no to Afghanistan. They have done nothing. We are the ones facing the higher has prices. What happened to the congressman who spent $300,000 on a bathroom in his office in the capital building? Not a*****thing. We are headed towards socialism. And no lawmaker in Washington seems to give a damn.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rdnewt

Feb-25-13 11:49 AM

Judeye's philosophy always tends to go towards the old "To each according to his needs". I wonder where I have heard that before? Marx perhaps? Who is John Galt?

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-25-13 1:07 PM

Judeye, the "increase in revenues" was given. Now it's the administrations turn to show the "cuts". But they don't want to do that, so they are, yet again, blaming the republicans for not "compromising". A nice code for "agree with me or I'll call you whatever I can think of to make you the bad guys". This administration is showing it's true ineptness at an increasing pace. Soon enough even the staunchest supporters will realize Obama hasn't a clue how to fix the things he swore he could five years ago. Hopefully the nation survives the next three plus years and we can get someone with some business sense in congress and the White House. Not a neighborhood organizer with a smooth line of BS that played so well to the hope and change crowd.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Feb-25-13 2:05 PM

MikeDavis, interesting how you republicans always refer to the job Obama had right out of college, thinking it is such a put down. I personally admire a person more who is willing to go to a poor neighborhood and help the residents more than someone who goes to Wall Street and takes advantage of others to pocket millions. You seem to forget that Obama was a state legislator, constitutional law professor, lawyer and Senator. And his plan has moved us out of the recession, and think how much better we would be in Congress had actually allowed his plan to go forward, like the Jobs Act. We would be well on our way to improving our infrastructure and pumping more money into the economy. The austerity plan most republicans advocate that has been practiced in Europe which has hurt their recovery.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Feb-25-13 2:05 PM

Christopher, you hit the nail on the head with this article, as usual.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-25-13 2:45 PM

"You Republicans?" LOL. I've said many times I don't like either party Marcia. I said what I said because that is what the man is doing. Spending more than what is coming in is never a good idea. We have been doing that for several years now. Your hero's answer was the rich need to be taxed more. Okay, the republicans (in your book, the "enemy") agreed and gave Obama what he wanted. What does he do with the increased revenue? Pay down the deficit? No. Offer up some cuts to social programs? No. He proposes preschool for all. MORE spending? BRILLIANT, let's keep that government credit card going until it melts. And why not have the wife run off to Aspen for a well earned taxpayer funded vacation after the hard work she's put in. Meanwhile he runs down to Florida for a week to play golf with Tiger, on the taxpayers expense account. Keep saying he's looking out for your best interest Marcia. About the time you realize he's worthless as boobs on a boar the country shoul

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-25-13 2:47 PM

should be toast.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-25-13 2:50 PM

And you keep hammering on the jobs act. I haven't read the thing. But I would like to know what was in it that the republicans didn't like so much they killed it. What little perks were buried deep in that thing? Bringing jobs back to this country should be in everyone's best interest but something made them go hold on a minute. What is the media not telling the people about that?

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Marcia

Feb-25-13 8:26 PM

What did republican dislike about the jobs bill? The fact that it would help the country get out of the recession and make the president look good. They are willing to kill our economy to make Obama look bad.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-25-13 9:36 PM

Marcia, do you know the scariest part of your reply? It is that you believe that. No politician is going to kill jobs coming into his district or state for such an assinine reason. Next you are going to be saying it was because Obama is half-black. Because, of course, all republicans long for the pre-Civil war days according to Biden and MSNBC right?

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

concerned

Feb-25-13 11:42 PM

I usually do not agree with you Paul but you hit this one out of the park good job even though as you said it will change nothing. The government is too big to fail!

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Feb-25-13 11:57 PM

Once again, the JOBS bill. Marcia and Judeye refuse to acknowledge the fat that that bill also undoes regulations to the finance industry to where things will get out of control again, but ok, blame republicans for stifling it "for no reason"....

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

joew

Feb-26-13 6:17 AM

Sure glad we are out of the recession Marcia and that we have a balanced budget.Spending about 7 billion on a another head start program that we don't have is just brilliant. Probably endorsed by the former Greek Premier that Columbia University just hired to teach economics. Obama's own Department of HHS recently released a report saying that after third grade the head starters were no further ahead than other children. All it is is buying votes by providing free babysitting.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bob1957

Feb-26-13 6:37 AM

When I read the article I found it simplistic in its premise and simplistic with no idea how to evenly distribute NEEDS to communities. Not one suggestion. When I read soloquial statements as response I become suspicious that the person has no command of the language and thereby little real knowledge. I am positive that maybe two of the people that reponded here have evere WRITTEN a grant. Note written, not filling out paperwork or forms. Real grants require extensive narrative, data, planning and coopration among community resources. Something not mentioned here. This article is a cunnard.

0 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Nathan

Feb-26-13 7:39 AM

Bob, it's funny how the boot fits. I believe you meant to articulate words such as colloquial and canard. Truly a great parapraxis, which makes us wonder if it is due to inattention, incomplete sense or insufficient knowledge? Maybe we should write a grant for our study...

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MikeDavis

Feb-26-13 8:00 AM

bob1957...I was going to answer you but why bother? Your so full of yourself there probably isn't much room in your head for listening. Nathan nice sarcasm. Can we get back on topic now? The problem is there is more money being spent, given, and disappearing than even this nation can afford. Finding the waste in this amount of spending shouldn't be that difficult a task. How does the IRS find a 50 dollar error by a tax payer with such ease? Yet not one other federal agency can find where they are bleeding capital? It's time for a private citizens panel to review the books, after all they are "our" books, correct?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 54 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web