A thought on Economics

Dear Editor:

Those of us who received our economics training from “the School of Hard Knocks” often find it very difficult to understand those in control of our government finances whose training is primarily theoretical and driven by a flawed ideology. Our schooling has taught us that raising the limit on a “maxed out” credit card is not a fix for the problem nor is it likely to be allowed by the bank issuing the card. We also know that we cannot take more money by force from our employers or customers simply because we have spent far more than our income over a long period of time.

We are being told that the financial mess created and maintained in Washington D.C. can only be remedied by increasing the “credit card limit” and forcibly taking more money from us taxpayers who are the issuing bank, employers and customers.  Since Minnesota is prevented from incurring debt by its constitution, Governor Mark Dayton can only demand more money by force from his employers and customers to support his excessive spending.  Fortunately he has no credit card.

Why do we tolerate two completely different sets of rules, one for our government and one for our individual “economies”?  If we tried to adopt the government rules we would be given “free” health care, board and room in prison for fraud, extortion and possibly armed robbery.

David Greer
Cambridge

  • Dean

    The answer, sir, is that we do not live on an island. Your spending (or lack there of) shapes the economies micro and macro of others throughout the world. We do not live in 19th century anymore sir. Go back and research the wild economic ride that this country went on advocating the policies that you suggest. You betray one of the core Republican values by advocating protection policies and restrictions on government. Republicans are free traders, less restrictions on actions, and more interactions with a global market. It is people like you that make me question the intent of the Republican party (and I am one sir, so please don’t play the Democratic card). We should be about job creation and invention to bring down the debt, controling the market place and not being afraid of it. Your ideas do not grow this country, it hurts it. We should be pushing for innovation and new ideas as Eisenhower and others did during the baby boom generation. We do not need to hide on an island as the tone of your letter suggest. So we spend money, my frustration is that, does that produce results and are we being wise? There we might agree the answer is no. It shouldn’t be about a question of money, money will be spent, but how it is going to be spent is the better and right question. Do some research to see what the effects of your policy suggest (see 1870-1900 time period) and then look at when Republicans were not afraid and lead (see the baby boom time period). The latter policy is what we should be advocating. When we look at policy, then ask the hard question of all of our leaders, including Governor Dayton. Is our money being used wisely and for the greatest benefit on a macro and micro economic level?

up arrow