I’m sure it’s no longer offered in high school and likely hasn’t been offered in years because it makes too much sense and doesn’t cater to “niche” and “boutique” children, but do you remember when Home Economics — or its shortened title of Home Ec — was endemic? At one point in public schooling we actually taught students how to manage their households, organize their lives, and live within a budget.
It’s clear that members of the current Obama Administration and the Demorat Party — along with a number of Republicans — never took a basic Home Ec 101 class in high school or college.
The foundation of budgeting and economics is, really, remarkably easy to understand. When people indicate you absolutely must have a PhD to understand economics, then all the bells and klaxons ought to be clanging in your head.
Because it doesn’t take a genius to determine the very foundational concept of economics, which is:
– Output should not exceed input. That means, spending should not exceed revenues, or there will be problems.
Period.
There. You are now an economics genius.
So: what happens when your spending exceeds your revenues at home? This: you owe money; you go into debt.
What happens when you go into debt?
You must determine where to cut spending. Obviously, you cannot continue spending money you do not have.
Otherwise you may find liens against the property you own — and the items you do not own (purchased on credit) may become subject to repossession. In other words, there will be consequences to your poor economic choices. Your credit rating may plummet. Persons and entities may not want to lend you money any more. You may be sent to “collections.” Your life will not be pleasant. You may have to declare bankruptcy, which will ruin your credit rating for many years to come.
There will be consequences to your overspending and failing to live within your means.
Again emphasized: spending must not exceed revenues.
Now, consider this: what makes you think that any government entity can step outside the realm of basic economics? What makes anyone think economic basics don’t apply to government and its numerous agencies?
Therefore, what makes anyone think that any government — federal, state, city, county — can spend money it does not possess and continue to survive?
Just because it “wants” things? Just because its constituents “want” things?
Chances are, you know more about economics — now, after this lesson — than your average government budget analyst.
With this in mind, considering our current national economic plight, I ask two questions of you:
1. – Do you believe it’s a good idea to increase taxes and continue spending? [Yes or No]
2. – Do you believe it’s a good idea to cut spending and likewise cut taxes? [Yes or No]
Our future solvency and strength revolves around the proper answers to these questions. It really is this simple.
BZ
P.S.
In making this decision, please consider the following:
– Economic growth in the US is execrable;
– Some say a government bond default is unavoidable;
– US home sales are at their lowest point in recorded history;
– Joe Biden thinks this is all just fine;
– The US faces a looming tech decline enabled by the Demorats;
– Abobe, EA Games, eBay flee Fornicalia due to confiscatory tax rates and regulations;
HA! Great minds think a like I reckon. My post today was basically the same topic. Of course yours is written better…jerk.
#2 is the right answer… cut BOTH and give the true (people’s) economy a chance to recover.
Thanks Robert. Don’t denigrate yourself. Your niche is well founded. You make some excellent points in a way that I can’t sometimes even remotely touch.
NFO: but in reality. . . ?
BZ
Oh, don’t be silly, they can just print up more money! That is their economic strategy! Genius, ain’t it? Or do like California and give a bunch of IOUs, that works wonders!
Beth, I’m thinking that IOUs aren’t going to be working so well this time. There are some people thinking: no real checks, no real work.
BZ