The article in Reason is worth reading. However, the issue of the will of the governing classes to cut has to be considered. If we ask who benefits from the stimulus — the answer is the civil servant, the teacher… and their unions.
So if the average family were seeking to trim its operating costs, there are 28,953 non-essential dollars, well over 50 percent of total spending, that could hypothetically be cut. The federal government could do it as well. I don’t think citizens concerned about the nation’s economic future will accept arguments that spending can’t be cut when we taxpayers can and do cut our personal spending during difficult times. I also doubt that 0.02 percent is all that can be trimmed from the budget. The cuts we need and should demand are more like 10 percent, 20 percent, 30 percent, or more. It’s time for lawmakers and the policy community to start acting like real people with real money and to start excising those billions from the nation’s bloated budget.
In short, the left — who see their role as providing for the proleteriat — which they both idolise and need as justification for their salaries — benefits from the expansion of the state and the move to a levelling of society.
What they call economic justice used to be called the sin of… envy.
And… the state is now a huge structural burden that, as the author said, cannot shrink in times of trouble. I recall Regan closed down the cold war because keeping the Soviet army became unsustainable. It may that the same thing is happening to the USA…. but the civil pensions, the salaries of the state workers, and the size of government should and mus be cut before those services which defend our nations are cut.
In this the left (and Obama shows this) have their priorities backwards. You need wealth before you can acquire it to assuage the envy of the masses you have inflamed. And without security of contract and property, you will have no wealth.