The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Who Are You Calling Backward?

Text Size

In the Weekly Standard editorial Jim links to below, Matthew Continetti writes, "Typically, the job of politics is to figure out what kind of society we would like to have, and then figure out a way to pay for it." The problem with this view is that how much something will cost is a key part of the decision making process (or should be). Somebody may want a new television at $800, may be on the fence about it if it's $1000, but will rule it out at $2,000. Likewise, polls show that Americans want more government services, but there is only so much that they are willing to pay for them.

Unfortunately, at every level of society, figuring out how to pay for the stuff that we want has simply meant going into debt. And that's what got us into the current mess in the first place. Regardless of whether or not they could afford it, Americans bought the TVs they craved, the cars they wanted, and houses that they liked. Similarly, Obama doesn't pay for the society he wants, because doing so would mean raising taxes on more than 5 percent of the country -- he simply puts us into debt. Just like the housing boom, this will be unsustainable over time. So this shouldn't be about what's more politically popular at the moment, but what's more responsible in the long run. Is it charging that $2000 TV that you can't afford on your credit card? Or is it determining how much you can afford, and then finding the best TV you can at that price?

View all comments (4) | Leave a comment

Rick V.| 4.6.09 @ 11:56AM

Hold it right there, Mr. Klein: "Regardless of whether or not they could afford it, Americans bought the TVs they craved, the cars they wanted, and houses that they liked. Similarly, Obama doesn't pay for the society he wants." I have a real problem with that sort of comparison and I hear it constantly. Yes, some Americans are guilty of that practice, but let's be clear - I pay my bills with my own money. Obeyme wants to use my money (and yours and that of everyone reading this) to pay for his dream toys at the same time that he flatters our enemies and disarms our own country. No government agency strong-armed my bank into giving me a mortgage - I'm paying mine, thank you. My wife and I manage our finances and debt level responsibly; no one would ever accuse the U.S. government of doing the same. I would expect that kind of "everyone's guilty of the same abuses" accusation from the Nation, CNN or the Today Show. I ain't the problem because I use credit, pal. Get of my back.

Philip Klein| 4.6.09 @ 1:12PM

Rick V., I agree with you 100%. When I talk about Americans buying stuff that they couldn't afford, I mean those who didn't pay their bills. As somebody who lives modestly, within my means, I share your anger that Obama wants to use my money to subsidize those who were irresponsible, and to pay for his social agenda.

Bob| 4.6.09 @ 5:06PM

Philip -- interesting take. I hadn't thought of it that way, but it makes sense. Now that I think about it, it isn't just Obama that deals with government that way, but all politicians of both parties. This is a top down approach. I guess we'd both prefer a bottom up approach.

You are one of the very few here that has some really intelligent insights. Thank you.

Rick V.| 4.7.09 @ 7:09AM

Mr. Klein,
Thank you for the clarification, and I'm certain that was your intent all along. I've been a bit touchy lately. This whole "hope and change" thing is not working out well for those of us who are actually paying other people's bills. You know, those folks who think they're entitled to the lifestyle that we who are employed are able to provide for our families.