It’s Time to Change the Change and Start Over
- Print print this page
- Discuss 38 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
There’s a worn spot through the leather of the steering wheel in my pickup.
There are rips in the seat as well. My hand naturally rests on the torn spot, and the rips in the leather seat scratch my legs. It’s to be expected from an 11-year-old vehicle with 148,000 miles on it.
I’d like to buy a new truck. Actually, I’d like to buy two new trucks, because the other one is even older than this pickup. But I won’t. We’ll continue to drive these, patching them together as best we can and hoping they won’t collapse before the economy turns back to growth and I feel confident in managing debt.
Until then, the rips and tears remain a constant and persistent reminder of my own fiscal insecurities amid larger national economic stagnancy, uncertainty and growing gloom.
It’s a fascinating lesson about the difference between individual American households or business owners, that they can so easily recognize when it’s time to tighten the belt, to retract, save, avoid excessive debt and balance budgets, while government continues to spend, bicker, and look for ways to blame others for its own fiscal irresponsibility.
It’s unfortunate that Standard & Poor’s downgrade of U.S. long-term debt came despite $2 trillion in faulty assessment data, but the S&P had long warned of this possibility if politicians didn’t begin to address our unsustainable entitlements as a major source of that debt. Even with the downgrade’s shortcomings, however, it doesn’t change the truth of the call.
The downgrade was intended to land — and should have landed — on Washington elites like a face slap. Gone with the winds of political correctness, in days gone by, a face slap was a useful way to shock someone into instant recognition that he or she had done or said something completely out of bounds. In most cases, the one slapped took corrective action without delay.
Not this bunch. The Obama administration went after the S&P, and Democrats went after the tea party, calling it the “tea party downgrade.” Seriously? The most strident group in the country, advocating reduced government spending that if implemented might have avoided the negative grade assessment, is to blame?
So here we are. A modest but ultimately inconsequential debt ceiling agreement has been passed after histrionics and political lunacy which ran right up to the brink of debt default; and a downgraded assessment of our nation’s capability to meet its fiscal responsibilities has reverberated around the world, gyrating markets and creating new negative rumors and speculation on the strength of other nations besides our own. Whispers growing louder have it that a return to global recession is more than a possibility.
This country should be leading the world toward recovery by now and on a renewed path toward growth, low unemployment and stability. We’re not, and it’s because of a political, social and economic ideology that government can tax, spend and stimulate us back to fiscal health while at the same time provide limitless social entitlements.
It’s not working. Or, maybe it is working if as a nation we’re willing to accept the end of American exceptionalism and gratefully embrace European socialist models of economic mediocrity, low growth and steady higher rates of unemployment. At the moment, that’s the road we’re bumping down.
Sadly, because no one wants any president to fail, this presidency is becoming a study in clueless leadership.
In times of trouble, America looks to its president for strength, integrity and conviction in the principles that made our country great. This president blames everyone but himself for our woes, has no plan to meet our financial obligations, and remains wedded to the notion that government is always the solution rather than the problem.
I like to think that the average American voter has seen enough. That in 2012 they’ll vote for the candidates they think recognize that the size and scope of the federal government must be slashed. That tax codes and entitlements must be reformed, and that businesses must once again be seen not as our enemies, but as the true generators of sound economies, employment security and growth.
In the meantime, I suppose I can still afford tape, glue and Band-Aids to hold my trucks together.
Geoff Cutler is owner of Cutler Tree LLC in Southern Pines and is a regular contributor to The Pilot and PineStraw magazine. Contact him at geoffcutler@embarqmail.com.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
Geoff, sorry your business is doing so badly. If you recall, I suggested a while back that you should advertise more. If you don't think you can turn it around, there is still time for you to run for president and save all of us from ourselves. I'll bet you would be good "stumping".
jimt 1 year, 9 months ago
Naw, I think he's "barking up a wrong tree." But, I agree that we are in a "knotty" situation, and at least Geoff gives us his version of the un-"varnished" truth.
JK 1 year, 9 months ago
Geoff,
This is certainly one of your best contributions to date. It has to be refreshing every couple of weeks for Pilot readers to get your take after being barraged by the otherwise liberal nonsense this rag is known for. I only wish the paper had the same expectation of all their other Sunday columnists’…
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
Thanks JK!
Easygoing 1 year, 9 months ago
At some point I assume you will provide detail information and suggestions on exactly what state, local and federal programs should be cut and/or reduced. Rather than the usual broad suggestions to throw Obama out which is unlikely to solve anything, just replace one sent of entitlements and favored treatment with another. And when you provide these detail recommendations do not forget to include our military spending which accounts for about 63% of discretionary spending. Looking forward to the detailed analysis with verifiable facts.
honesty2 1 year, 9 months ago
Here's a start for you: Cut state dept.'s mosque refurbishment/building to middle east: $770 million in Cairo alone 2010 UN funding: 2011 request $516.3 million (+2.182 billion for peacekeeping) NATO funding: 711.8 million (we're doing the brunt of the work for Europe) O's war in Libya $715 million in June European military bases unless host country helps pay ATF (Fast and Furious/Gunwalker debacle/disaster) $460 million increase to IRS and restructure corporate taxes (let's get flat tax) medicare fraud WH czar budget (and have them subjected to hearings/approval) no govt money to unions/unions repay stop aid to dictatorships and countries hostile to US Where's your list?
Mark106 1 year, 9 months ago
Great article! I couldn't agree more! Sorry , have to edit... Just read DR's joke. Thanks for the Professionalism also!
skylinefirepest 1 year, 9 months ago
Easy...if you want verifiable spending cuts they are extremely easy to locate...but it's not likely that either Geoff or I will do your homework for you. But an easy hint...when our politicians fly, quite frequently they upgrade and that costs the taxpayers millions. Check the internet for the old Grace Report done several years ago. This administration is simply not interested in cutting spending and it's making us look stupid in the eyes of the economic world.
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
You know who else flies a lot, the military. What say we bring them all home. That would save billions. Let the spending cuts start now and let the spending cuts start with programs that are most cherished by those screaming loudest about spending cuts.
Toda 1 year, 9 months ago
Along with all of Europe! So what has POTUS'O's responsibility for the economic stratification of Europe's financial mess? Perhaps POTUS'O should start by cutting the expense of two wars that is draining our treasures and lives of our warriors? Recall this economic mess started under the Bush Administration that was evident in 2008. Had Bush had another term we would be in a Depression. How quickly most forget that Bush had a surplus, and left Obama with trillions of debt and two wars costing a billion dollars a month.
FaithinUSA 1 year, 9 months ago
good article....
Toda 1 year, 9 months ago
skylinefire ~ "either Geoff or I will do your homework for you" perhaps your threads would have more credence with supporting links to provide additional information as opposed to just taking jabs at POTUS'O and his administration. If you write it, you should be able to support your claims with other writers points of view from several sites. Like when in college, writing a paper and providing a biographical reference for quotes.
Zippy 1 year, 9 months ago
Anyone who thinks that "growth" is the solution to anything is among the hordes who've gotten us into what is now an almost inevitable decline into pain, surrering, and catastrophe. The USA and now the world, using our obsolete model, Capitalism, is now hopefully running its course into obscurity, but it will have to destroy the earth and its peoples before its through. Ideas about going forward have been the obsession we've been hooked on, now for centuries, so we could go on building, developing, as if there was no limit to what we could do. But anyone with any sense now realizes that you just can't keep building and growing without consequences that are no longer taking us forward but will take us backward as we try the same solutions, MORE, when increasingly there is no more and now the earth will start coughing up the poison we've spread into the environment, mainly carbon, and nature will make your dreams of growth a sad reminder of human folly. So what can we do? Get used to living on a survival regimen, use less than ever, grow as little as possible. This will cause even greater hardship than we can imagine, for one thing we've spawned more people on earth than it can sustain, and future generations are in for it, and its all our fault.
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
And Bob, your preference to Capitalism is...what exactly?
TreadLightly 1 year, 9 months ago
Capitalism has pain among people who lose their jobs when supply, demand or obsolesence requires.. But they find other jobs. The only alternative to ADJUSTING the work force and markets is to let a big government sustain the "even keel."
That does not lessen pain, but shares it over a larger number of people. Then when your buggy factory goes obsolete, you keep your job, but the whole country slides a notch further toward inevitible poverty, rather than inovate and re-tool.
We have sustained a high standard of living in America, even though we are sinking into socialism. But as more and more people become less and less productive, we are putting it on the CREDIT CARD. Now the "minimum payment due" is getting larger, and we are facing the same economic shock that an individual sees when he charges up a few credit cards and then has them all cut off at once.
When the wealth is eventually burned up, nations come to rest at the natural level of communism/socialism reflected in Cuba. You may see some duct tape upholstery repairs on some shiney Corvettes and .Rolls Royces in coming years!
Then, hopefully, the light will come on again, and we will not be to proud to get back into crass commercialism, like China.
BOTTOM LINE: Capitalism is the only system that causes the most people to rise to their full potential, rather than lose all heart and incentive in a quagmire of equality. Not to mention the savage conditions of the Godless state that most socialism promotes.
skylinefirepest 1 year, 9 months ago
Toda-- Everything that I post is easily verifiable and I am doing simply that...writing a post, not a term paper. I think it's also easy to recognize when I'm writing opinion as opposed to fact. So if you think you can catch me in a lie, have at it! I can verify every fact that I write.
skylinefirepest 1 year, 9 months ago
JER-- Your comment shows hatred and lack of common sense. If you were an advocate of cutting spending ( which, by the way, we are assured you are not ) would you start with your local police and fire coverage?? I doubt it.
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
I most certainly am in favor of spending cuts. What makes me different from you is that I also am in favor of revenue increases. I believe that a combination of the two will help us all back on the road to recovery, whereas, your "spending cuts only" approach does not. Yes, I have a hatred.... for war. I am a staunch supporter of protecting the USA and when another government attempts to attack us, I will be in the front lines of her defense. The "wars" we choose to fight these days (and maybe going all the way back to Korea), are not to defend the USA from any attacker and I am 100% against them. This garbage of "we have to fight them there so we don't have to fight them here" is costing us all of our human and monetary treasures. For all of you who believe that you need to be armed to the teeth and killing someone, become a soldier of fortune and sell yourself to the highest foreign government bidder. In the meantime, bring all military home now.
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
JER... If you'll tell us about the time the federal government asked for more tax revenues and then didn't spend all those added revenues, causing them to then ask for more on top of that, I'm sure we'd all like to hear about it. There is not enough tax revenue in the world economy to pay for the deficits and debt we have already racked up. Government doesn't need to get bigger, it needs to get radically smaller, and soon. It's about buying things you can't pay for, not revenues.
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
geoffcutler, perhaps some wood chips got in your eye while at work today. I stated that a C O M B I N A T I O N of spending cuts and revenue increases are needed. You have chosen to ignore the first part concerning the spending cuts and focus on the Republican-right wing-teahadist talking points mantra of how you're all being taxed to death. I have already proposed a cut that would go a long way toward balancing a budget, paying off the debt and building a surplus. Bring all the military back into this country where they can protect our borders from any type of invasion by foreign governments. I also favor a revamping of our tax system and would like to see a flat tax or a "fair tax" proposal made that more evenly spreads out the tax burden. I am not opposed to "smaller government" so long as we continue to have a government that is looking out for everyone of it's citizens, regardless of social status, religion or political leanings.
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
And I'm saying NO to revenue increases...EVER! One sided? Yup! Absolutely, and it's long past time. Let's start by disbanding the Depts. of Energy and Education, then the IRS and move to a Flat or Fair oriented tax as you suggest... let's see... close the Post office, sell Amtrak...I'm just getting started....
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
I have often heard the statement: "The government needs to operate on a budget, just like any family has to." Using your logic, if your household suffered a series of situations that necessitated your need to replace your roof, install a new HVAC system, dig up and replace your sewage system, get a construction crew in to reset your pool that has mysteriously popped out of the ground, replace you family vehicles and replace all your appliances ...all within a period of 90 days, you are saying that you would start cutting back on your cable TV package, eat out less often and skip that next trip back to Boston...but under NO CIRCUMSTANCES would you look for any extra income to help pay for all the stuff that needs done. It's your house and your problem so you can handle it anyway you want to, but not even considering seeking some extra tree service jobs to get this stuff paid for seems stupid to me. PS: does the post office operate on tax dollars? Have the rates you charge your customers ever gone up?
jgc 1 year, 9 months ago
Goeff--the S&P downgrade came from the inability of Washington to demonstrate a viable plan to address the deficit. While entitlements are part of the problem, they are not the entire problem. The S&P pointed out (in advance) the requirement of a long term solution that was balanced and had elements to increase revenues--taxes, which the GOP flatly refused.
This revenue refusal is being questioned by not only the S&P, but also economists from both parties (Henry Paulson - Bush's Treasury Secretary & Martin Feinstein - Reagan's Economic Advisor both called the no revenue mantra of the GOP troublesome and more damaging to the fragile economy leading to further job loss and instability). Also, if you agree with the GOP on the Bush era tax cuts being untouchable and a key element to stimulate growth (jobs), read Warren Buffet's OP-ED in today's editions of the NY Times & USA Today
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
jgc... Yes, I saw that piece...right after I read "For Buyers, High Anxiety May Trump Low Rates" which was on the front page today of the NYT. If I'm in sync with the NYT on any day, but particularly the day before they publish the same sentiment as my column, you know we're in trouble. Further, Buffet's been asking the Feds to tax him more for years. Nothing new there, and 100% tax of income on all millionaires in U.S. wouldn't put a dent in the deficit.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 9 months ago
I wonder what percentage of the leftists truly believe the tea party is responsible for the downgrade vs those who are simply trying to deflect where the blame truly lies? Good column, Geoff
irkim13 1 year, 9 months ago
Why can't or don't Buffet and is kind pay more and not use tax loopholes? There is nothing stopping them from paying as much as they want. Why not lead by example? Pay more than is required, do not use deductions or loopholes and then tell me or anyone else to pay more. That goes for anyone else promoting higher taxes.
jgc 1 year, 9 months ago
fugutive guy: Where's the blame lie? How about the administration that inherited a surplus only to run up a deficit. In fact the budgets of the Bush Administration ran up deficits while EXCLUDING the costs of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, isolating them as "special circumstance expenses". This is the same administration that when asked about rising deficits, to quote VP Cheney said "deficits are irrelevent.". So now this same administration's party (which was in charge of Congress during this time of spending has all of a sudden got religion about deficits, and in denial about running up the tab.
moonchild7 1 year, 9 months ago
The BLAME is squarely on the AMERICAN people who "bought" into having an economy that is based on RETAIL SALES.....70%! The MARKETING MACHINE started revving it's engines in the early 70's and was in FULL NON-STOP mode until the late 90's and early 2000's. From 1972 until now I have only bought 2 NEW cars/trucks. All of the others have been used and Geoff I still have my 1973 Chevy truck although I don't drive it as much as I used to....so Geoff just buy a good used one. I've owned seven homes, none of them new, all Fixer-Uppers. The remedy is probably a long way off because RETAIL cannot save our country. It should NEVER have gotten this far but it did prove that brainwashing is a powerful tool. The Governors of Florida and Ohio DID NOT accept any Stimulus Funds for High Speed Rail in their States. Very bad move because that is where a lot of the answers are. It also is in the Re-Tooling of the Boeing and LockHeed military manufacturing plants so that those trains and even streetcars and windmills can be made. I read in the Fayetteville Observer that the Hoke Co. Ethanol plant is going to be auctioned off. WHY did they go out of business? Couldn't they re-tool for other grains or grass? We have deliberate failure now at the hands of the Rich and Powerful. They are sitting on over $3 Trillion "waiting" for the recovery. They want failure and not prosperity because the longer they sit on it and not have to pay hardly any taxes, they'll get RICHER still.
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
Moon...I'm not sure what you're on about here, but let's be careful about blaming the American people for our current fiscal crisis. All I've ever done, and most of the people I know, is work, pay my bills, my taxes, and try to stay out of debt so that one day I might have saved enough to retire. That's looking less likely everyday, and it's not because of the American people. It's a government that is spending more than they can ever hope to generate to give to someone else. My trucks are for work. My personal vehicles ARE pre-owned
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
I disagree, Geoff. The people of this country are 100% responsible for the current situation. It is very easy to point fingers and assign blame. This country is a Republic. We elect officials to represent our views in governing the country. This is a far more serious responsibility than most give it. If you did not vote, YOU are part of the problem, if you voted without knowing who or what you were voting for, YOU are the problem. If you are not aware of current events in the day to day operation of your town, county, state and nation, YOU are the problem. If you are a Republican,a Democrat,a Tea Partyist or member of any political group, YOU are the problem because you are not looking at the situations from an unbiased viewpoint. In short, everyone of us is, to some degree, the problem. The folks running the government in our home towns, in Moore County, in Raleigh and in Washington are US!! We have the government we deserve. I admire the fact that you and I and many others worked hard, paid our bills and our taxes and tried to stay out of debt. Not everyone in this country is doing that. For many, a new car is more important than home ownership, a vacation in Maui is more important than carrying health insurance, the latest personal electronic device is more important than a savings account. If we want responsible leaders, we need responsible citizens. Yes, Geoff, the problem may not be you or I specifically, but it is "us".
geoffcutler 1 year, 9 months ago
To the extent that people who don't vote, or are uneducated on the issues are a problem, I concede the point and agree with you. The election of a progressive socialist like Obama seems to prove your point. But keep in mind that part of this phenomenon is due to the natural ebb and flow of our type of representative democracy. Obama was pushed over the top by educated independent voters who believed the hope change rhetoric. They weren't savvy enough to see that it was nonsense and a guise to structurally alter our democracy into a Western European socialist economy where redistrutionist policies and high taxes hoped to hand money from the hard workers to the non-workers. We're still America, and so the Tea Party was born. In 2012, the independents will switch back. They've seen enough, because this time, the left totally overplayed its hand, ala Obamacare that the public did not want.
JER 1 year, 9 months ago
We can agree that there is an ebb and flow in our form of government. I choose to call it reactionary rather than "a natural ebb and flow", but the result is the same. One segment of the populace comes up with their ideas on how to govern, get elected and start implementing their plan, which causes a backlash from other segments of the populace who have different ideas. We'll never know if a plan will actually work because the opposition begins immediately and all we do is argue about it rather than giving proposals an honest chance to succeed or fail. This scenario is not limited to Republicans, both parties and fringe groups like the TP all are actively engaged in doing it. To some, this is how they think the government should work. They believe working together and cooperation and compromise are all bad things. It's their way or no way. Some like yourself believe that unfettered capitalism is the only way to go and would not consider blending other ideas into a plan that could address the entire set of circumstances facing our country. Believe it or not, everyone in this country is not striving to see how much wealth they can accumulate and how many "toys" they have to play with. Many people, like myself, simply want a steady job, earning enough money to have a home, food on the table, good health care and a safe environment. I voted for Obama because I believed then, and still do now, that we needed a change from the direction the country was going and I had hope that he could be the person to get us all pointed in that direction. I am disappointed that he has not been a stronger leader but recognise that he is someone who has tried to find middle ground where all of us can agree and all of us can share the sacrifice of not having everything we would like. His inability to to accomplish goals is, in part, due to not having anyone to negotiate with and, in part, not having the desire to be a dictator. I would like to see him take stronger, more passionate stands on key issues, but recognise that would only stiffen the opposition to his goals.
jimt 1 year, 9 months ago
It's all how you do or calculate the accounting. Does using public money on infrastructure projects, and the new hiring the private companies that win the construction bids will do benefit the economy, and if so, how does one calculate these benefits?
Does building a dam with public money that generates "x" amount of electricity every year and/or irrigates "y" acres of farmland every year, make money in the long run for the U.S.Treasury?
Does building or repairing a bridge over which a lot of commercial traffic flows make money in the long run for the U.S. Treasury? For the County or City where the bridge is located? Is building or repairing the bridge the proper role of government?
Would providing land grants or tax subsidies or technology support to create huge wind farms in the mid-west and huge solar panel facilities in the southwest to generate 10%, 15%, 30% of U.S. electricity by 2020, 2030 make money for the government(s) involved in the future?
What would the macroeconomic implications be of such investments in the local economies?
How many additional jobs would be created in addition to the jobs directly associated with the projects? How many additional jobs would those jobs create, and so on?
I often have the sense the budget deficit hawks simply do not a) believe such projects are warranted, or are the federal government's responsibility; or b) simply reject the multiplier effect of public sector spending on local economies.
It's now fashionable to debunk the achievements of FDR's "infrastructure" projects in reducing the impact of the Depression. I think this revisionist history is wrong on the face of it. But in any event, can anyone seriously argue that the Hoover Dam, the Grand Cooley Dam, the TVA, and other such projects did not make a positive return on their investment many times over from the taxes paid on the economic activity their existence has generated since the 1930's?
moonchild7 1 year, 9 months ago
Geoff, I'm just talking about the way Americans started to use CHARGE CARDS for everything instead of SAVING their money and then making a purchase. That was the root cause of the problem...plus warz....and tax breaks and Medicare's new drug benefits. AMERICA"S RETAIL TRAIN had been on that track for many years and the notion that it should have or could have been fixed by now is WRONG. It hit the wall and it has to be rebuilt. We must invest in AMERICA'S Infrastucture before it's too late and NOT in DESIGNER JEANS or IPHONES.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 9 months ago
"All I've ever done, and most of the people I know, is work, pay my bills, my taxes, and try to stay out of debt so that one day I might have saved enough to retire."
Amen to that, same here. I cannot imagine expecting someone else to pay my way.
moonchild7 1 year, 9 months ago
"I cannot imagine expecting someone else to pay my way." So for the sake of the conversation, what if you became disabled, could no longer work or have an income to feed, cloth and shelter yourself. What do you do? Hit the streets in your wheelchair with a sign asking for food? Kill yourself? or go to our "Social Services" System and try to get some help? The latter being a set of programs that we ALL pay into for emergency situations that are often temporary. What do the TEAPOTS want done with the children, elderly and disabled who CANNOT take care for themselves?
fugitiveguy 1 year, 9 months ago
Many people now allow others to pay their way and they are in no way disabled. For those truly unable to work I have no objection to them recieving funds from social programs. It is a common tactic for the left to portray conservatives as callous, uncaring and greedy when it comes to the less fortunate. I have found quite the opposite is true.
honesty2 1 year, 9 months ago
Nice article.Speaking of size of government and paying one's own way, I think people may be interested in this list of congressional socialists and their agenda: http://www.scribd.com/doc/35733956/DSA-Members-American-Socialist-Voter-Democratic-Socialists-of-America-10-1-09.
moonchild7 1 year, 9 months ago
I think fugitiveguy that you've contradicted yourself (as most Teapots do) as far as America's social services programs are concerned. First, it's "I cannot imagine somebody else to pay my way" and then it's "I have no objection to them receiving funds from social programs." So, are you for it, before you are against it?" Or are you against it before you're for it?" or are you only against those who have DEFRAUDED the system? Well, those who have DEFRAUDED the system also includes Doctors, Dentists, Lawyers, Nurses, Health Care Centers and so on. It's NOT just the poor who have perhaps received assistance that they might not have been eligible for you know, but that's the NATURE of LIFE. Good and Evil. Dark and Light. Rich and Poor. The best we can do is help when and where help is needed and later perhaps punish those who have lied and cheated to get what is not their's. I don't have to portray conservatives as callous. They do so well on their own especially wanting the POOR who have such little incomes to begin with to start "PAYING SOME TAXES!" The RICH are just so overburdoned these days. Overburdoned with having to find more places to hide all the $$$$$$$$ they are taking in hand over fist! They think that it's better to HOARD it than to INVEST it in AMERICA.
honesty2 1 year, 9 months ago
whine (hwn, wn) v. whined, whin·ing, whines v.intr. 1. To utter a plaintive, high-pitched, protracted sound, as in pain, fear, supplication, or complaint. 2. To complain or protest in a childish fashion. 3. To produce a sustained noise of relatively high pitch: jet engines whining. v.tr. To utter with a whine.
fugitiveguy 1 year, 9 months ago
First, I have not contradicted myself at all. Second, do you think all who have a different point of view than yourself are "teapots" ? Childish name calling does not promote an exchange of ideas. I will leave it at that as I have chosen to at least attempt to take the high road on this forum.