The Presidential election of 2012 is fast approaching and that has people scrambling to take a popular stance on issues to win votes. The issues of spending cuts and the role of government in state affairs are big ticket items that many people have a variety of views on. The New York Times article “Deficits Reshape the Debate as Republicans Jockey for 2012” highlights the concerns of many well known Republicans such as Indiana governor Mitch Daniels, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, and former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin. All of them highlighted big spending with only Chris Christie actually talking about measures that could be taken by mentioning the raising of the retirement age for Social Security. Is it too early in the game for potential Presidential candidates to get specific or should they just keep it to generalizations? It seems to me that the American people should demand more from politicians and not settle for vague statements about how the country should be run or its problems fixed. Cutting the budget is portrayed as a quick and easy fix to the country’s financial problems but it does not seem to be the answer as it only seems to compound an already growing and pressing issue.
With these cuts, tensions rise and people are forced to sacrifice. In America hypocrisy abounds in which people want others to sacrifice for the good of the whole, just as long as they don’t have to. In society there must be give and take and people, including the decision makers, must understand that these sacrifices are going to affect many people. If you cut spending on things such as public workers, there are going to be services that can either no longer be available or will be less efficient and effective. An example of this is the current budget cuts in Wisconsin. Cutting in the public sector is only forcing more people into the job market where too many unemployed people cannot find a job. On top of this is the difference between private sector jobs and public sector jobs. The private sector outsources jobs to other country’s to cut costs and maximize profit. The public sector cannot do this. A states DMV cannot be sent to China. So, these jobs need to be performed and if you cut the amount of people doing them, those workers remaining have to perform the work with fewer staff and fewer hours. This makes it more difficult for people to take advantage of public services.
Another sad result of these issues is the divide that is being created in America. In a New York Times article, a few people were interviewed and their statements betray and “us vs. them” mentality in which people in the private sector are angry at having lost their jobs and are trying to take it out on those who have what they lack. It seems that if we give up unions, as some people advocate, it would make it easier for large companies to take advantage of workers. This makes it cheaper. It’s a catch-22 in which the very laws that protect workers and provide them with substantial benefits are the very reason that companies are going oversees to find cheaper labor and leaving many Americans unemployed.
These problems are numerous and varied and there are many ideas about how to go about solving them. Some say less spending. Others say more spending. Some say reduce the control of government. Others say that government control is required. What do you think? Can the market fix itself if allowed to operate freely or is the government needed for oversight? Is our government capable of too much interference or will it always check itself? With the House voting to approve $60 billion in spending cuts, more and more people are going to be faced with this issue whether they want to or not.
4 comments:
Are the cuts meaningful cuts or just playing politics? If Republicans REALLY wanted to cut the deficit--why did they vote to continue tax cuts for the wealthiest?
Outstanding post, Justin. You have elaborated on how intertwined and not-so-simplistic our society's issues are. Also, I think you made a fine point about the value of public sector jobs when you imaginatively described the possibility of DMV work outsourced to China. And we thought the lines were long here!
To answer some of your questions – I do not believe in supply-side fiscal policy or the infallibility of the free market system (see “How Did Economists Get It So Wrong” by Paul Krugman, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/06/magazine/06Economic-t.html?_r=2). The idea that demand and competition will always equalize the market sounds good on paper, but reality is much more chaotic. Human beings and their greed often interfere with the clean math of economic principles – as we witnessed with the results of deregulating the financial industry (see the video “Inside the Meltdown” by Frontline, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/). Therefore, I believe in strong government and regulation of industries.
While governments may not be free of corruption, they are at least somewhat beholden to the people who have elected them into representative roles. Yes, business interests have bled too much into government these days (thanks to our lack of substantial campaign finance reform and our Supreme Court affirming the absurdity that corporations are “people” (see NYTimes article “Supreme Court Blocks Ban on Corporate Political Spending”, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/us/politics/22scotus.html). But the government check on corporate power might be one of the only protections we have remaining. Corporations are by definition self-interested and concerned with profit, rather than equity or fairness. In my opinion, we must reverse the work of Margaret Thatcher (a.k.a. the Mother of Deregulation (see “Thatcherite Economics – A Worthwhile Legacy?”, http://www.bized.co.uk/current/mind/2003_4/170504.htm), Reagan and others or risk a return to stagflation (see the video “Ben Stein’s Bad News About Inflation”, http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7357174n&tag=related;photovideo), futher budgetary woes and unimpeded exploitation by multinational corporations.
You make a well thought and extremely effective argument here. I agree 100 percent with you that when it comes to cuts society has to be less selfish and do what is best for society as a whole and not just what is good for them.
I really enjoyed reading this post Justin. Many of the points you brought up, as well as the questions that you posed towards the end, made me really think about this largely debated topic in a new way. I believe that our nation's market will need significant guidance in order to stabilize itself, whether or not that comes from the government or not; I definitely do not think that it can fix itself solely.
Post a Comment