default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

We need tax cuts and balanced budgets

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, August 25, 2011 12:00 am | Updated: 6:09 am, Thu Aug 25, 2011.

“The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.” — Cicero, 55 B.C.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

Hoover and Roosevelt tried Keynesian economics of massive spending during the ’30s recession, but Henry Morganthau Jr. said in 1939, “We tried many stimulus spending programs and the unemployment rate did not decrease.”

Calvin Coolidge inherited a tough recession from 1919-1921. His administration cut taxes, balanced budgets and slashed government spending, reducing federal debt by over a third in a decade. The economy grew, averaging just over 7 percent from 1924 to 1929 over the years of his presidency.

John Kennedy believed in tax cuts to spur economic growth, as did Reagan in dealing with the economic mess of Jimmy Carter.

While Obama presides over a debt downgrade, Ohio and Florida were upgraded by Standard & Poor’s in July. Ohio’s governor, John Kasich, pushed through a budget closing an $8 billion deficit without raising taxes and has an unemployment rate that fell to 8.6 percent from 11 percent a year ago. Ditto Florida. Gov. Rick Scott vetoed $615 million from the state budget, enacted a corporate income tax cut and added millions to the State’s rainy day fund.

Republican governors in Virginia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, Texas, Wisconsin and Oklahoma are following the same pattern — cutting spending, balancing budgets, and taking on pension reform in spite of massive resistance from the public employees unions. Texas has created more jobs since 2009 than all the other states combined.

Our economics illiterate president should emulate success, not history’s failures.

“A government which lays taxes on the people not required by urgent public necessity and sound public policy is not a protector of liberty, but an instrument of tyranny. It condemns the citizen to servitude.” — Calvin Coolidge, 1924.

Phyllis Roche


Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Account Deleted posted at 8:29 am on Sun, Aug 28, 2011.

    Jesse Hallum Posts: 57

    I am in agreement with you, Phyllis. The Obama Administration's economic policies are a disaster. What more can be said of a failed leader who cheerfully embraces the failures of history?

    I am debt-free and live well within my means; I see no reason why Government cannot do the same. Until Government does an about-face (in any way, shape or form), we will not see the return of economic prosperity.

  • Charles Nelson posted at 8:07 am on Sat, Aug 27, 2011.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 259

    "usgovernmentspending.com". Look up fy12

  • Charles Nelson posted at 8:05 am on Sat, Aug 27, 2011.

    Charles Nelson Posts: 259

    Eric, your information is incorrect. Military expenditures are 25% of the federal budget. Welfare is 12%, health care 23%, pensions 22%, education 3%, interest on the debt 6%, and a smattering of other small percentages in other departments.

  • daniel hutchins posted at 10:04 pm on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    daniel hutchins Posts: 1342

    Calvin Coolidge presided during years when Americans had an opportunity to rescind the Federal Reserve Act.

    Everything was great, so noone objected.

  • Robert Chapman posted at 8:53 am on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    Most earthquakes on the west coast are caused by the San Andreas fault, on the east coast it's Bush's Fault?

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 7:54 am on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Kevin stated... Darrell ...Ummm Cesar died April 23 1993. He doesn't think anything anymore.

    Obviously Kevin... I was simply making a play on words ....phonetically
    ( Julius Caesar 13 July 100 BC– 15 March 44 BC )

    I thought Bob's post was good, just trying to make light with humor. I would have to be fairly ignorant to not be aware of the death of César Chávez... maybe that is why you said what you did.

  • Gary Musto posted at 7:42 am on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    Gary Musto Posts: 506

    5,000 more Americans filed for unemployment last week, can't wait for that September speech from Obama, let's see, blame Bush, Japan, "tea party", putter, global cooling-warming, McDonald's, FOX News, etc.

    Correction, I mistakenly posted 0.04% GDP for first quarter, it was in fact 0.4%.
    Sorry for the error, but never the less Barack still has one fine economy going.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 7:04 am on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2106


    Ummm Cesar died April 23 1993. He doesn't think anything anymore.

  • Gary Musto posted at 6:53 am on Fri, Aug 26, 2011.

    Gary Musto Posts: 506

    Commerce Department revised Second Quarter GDP downward to 1.0%, whatever the Obama regime is doing it seems to be working. Tie today's report to that .04% first quarter GDP and you got yourself one fine economy, thank you Barack.

  • Darrell Baumbach posted at 9:10 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Darrell Baumbach Posts: 9405

    Bob Smith posted at 1:15 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011...I'm pretty sure that Cesar Chavez is not going to be causing us any problems.

    Bob... you might want to consider that Chavez thinks he is " Cesar"... that may be a problem to us after all.

  • Ryan Jameson posted at 4:49 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Not all military units have to ask for permission to remove people from existence Kevin. Trust me.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 4:18 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2106

    Opps, Ryan, we were both wrong. It looks like there are about 1000, not counting any "secret" bases, if we include military facilities and bases. Not sure where I got the 2000. So instead of closing 1250 bases we can close 625 bases.

    High value target? Are you saying the US would engage in political assassination? Surely not. It takes more than 5 hours for the military to get permission to use the latrine. ;-)

  • Bill Stamos posted at 3:56 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    skilos Posts: 93

    Phyllis Roche, Your letter is well written and addresses to the point America's economic problems today and what it would take to preserve our republic. I can also imagine the way the liberals of Cicero's day must have vilified him for his learned opinions.

  • Ryan Jameson posted at 3:38 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Kevin, there are not 2000 US military bases outside of the US. That number is less than 800. It is true that many military units can be deployed around the world (from the US) in a matter of a few hours. The U.S. Army 75th Ranger battalions can be combat ready and deployed in 18 hours. However, what about a scenario where a high value target is only viable for a short window? Well you sort of answered that question when you said that we do need bases around the world for quick response scenarios. I agree with you. That network of bases is already in place. We have a presence on all continents and we have special operations units deployed in close proximity to unstable regions. Closing more bases only inhibits our ability to quickly respond to situations. Rangers can be anywhere in 18 hours, that's great, but what if the high value target is only in one location for 5 hours? The other issue you don't recognize is the military supply line. Using the Ranger example again, what happens in extended combat? Are those Rangers expected to sit in an extended firefight for 18 hours while more supplies are delivered from the US? It takes a mass amount of supplies to equip even the smallest deployable force in a foreign combat area. The world may think we are bullies but they sure to get upset when the US military is not the first on scene to an incident.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 1:55 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2106

    I actually don't mind the welfare spending, but I think the fraud in it needs to be looked at harder. I also think that people who are able to work should not be eligible for welfare. It is suppose to be help back to your feet, not a life long career.

  • Kevin Paglia posted at 1:53 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Kevin Paglia Posts: 2106

    Cutting military spending doesn't mean we have to have a weaker military. There are over 2000 US military bases around the world. Cut those in half, bring most of those troops home and the spending will go down. And with all those troops at home we can reopen some of the closed military bases and create a better economic picture for those communities that will spread out across the region.

    30, 20 even ten years ago we may have needed more bases, but right now there is ample tech and capability of moving thousands of troops and literally tons of equipment around the world in just a few hours. There were Air Force pilots flying missions over Iraq who were home in the states for dinner. Now all that is needed is a couple consolidated bases in a region where troops can be deployed and be anywhere withing the hour.

    The reduced US military presence might even help out foreign relations since we won't look like bullies any more.


  • Ryan Jameson posted at 1:53 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Whoops, HUGO Chavez is who I meant. Thanks for pointing that out Mr. Smith. Looks like I will be needing an afternoon cup of coffee.

  • Bob Smith posted at 1:15 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Bob Smith Posts: 128

    I'm pretty sure that Cesar Chavez is not going to be causing us any problems.

  • Ryan Jameson posted at 12:07 pm on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Ryan Jameson Posts: 195

    Cutting the military sounds like an excellent idea! With countries out there like Iran, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Russia, China and of course the hardcore Islamic militants found all over the world it makes complete sense to decrease our military might. I think all those people like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Cesar Chavez and groups like Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas are all just kidding when they say they want America destroyed and all Americans killed. So of course it makes complete sense for us to cut military spending, after all less than minimum wage is way too much to pay our soldiers for risking their lives and leaving their families. And of course we do not need to keep up our military technology to ensure our safety from nuclear threats. We should ignore the part in the preamble to the Constitution where it says that "providing for the common defense" is an important part of this nations foundational structure.

    Ok, my heavily sarcastic rant aside, Eric, do you really believe that we should cut military spending before or along with all the other stuff we spend money on? I agree with your assertion that the Iraq war is no longer necessary and we need to leave. Quite frankly I could care less about "nation building" in a place that has only ever been a complete nation when under a violent dictatorship. Iraq and Afghanistan are tribal regions and any attempt at democracy there will only result in a fracture of the complete nation. However, it was necessary to remove the Taliban and Saddam Hussein from power.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 10:47 am on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    welfare is only 11% of the US budget entitlments and the military are 60% of the budget. We need to spend less but lets spend less where it will do some good. How about across the board cuts? less for satey net programs less military trim social security benefits and let medicare recipients pay for more of their care. how about we cut all those programs in half. I bet cutting the military by half alone would go a long ways to balancing the budget.

  • Robert Chapman posted at 10:10 am on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Bob Chapman Posts: 997

    When taxes "feed the hogs at the government trough" it makes it difficult to pay for the necessary services. Firemen, police, teachers and other employees that are in critical public service jobs are being layed off and their jobs eliminated so the money can be used to pay for welfare services and additional "necessary" government employees. There needs to be a total reform of welfare services. Or at the very least, an aggressive policing of welfare abuse. When the government expenses and payroll gets large enough, it will collapse under it's own weight, In my opinion that is exactly what is happening. Thank you BHO.

  • patrick crow posted at 9:12 am on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    patrick crow Posts: 10

    Keynesian economic theory has never worked. Cut corporate and individual tax rates and watch the employment numbers improve.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:39 am on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    Then again by the end of Coolidge's administration we were in the Great Depression.

  • Eric Barrow posted at 8:32 am on Thu, Aug 25, 2011.

    Eric Barrow Posts: 1604

    By 1927, during Coolidge administration, only the richest 2% of Americans paid taxes. That is something I could get on board with.


Recent Comments

Posted 3 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: Ron Portal’s letters repeat the…

Kaur, with your slant on my posts [thumbdown]


Posted 5 hours ago by M. Doyle.

article: Letter: No one’s faith should be scorned

Nope, it was: "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." He never implied killing anyone. Either way, what's your poi…


Posted 6 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: Suggestions for committee appoi…

Fiske: Another new guy, you state JoAnne hates Bob, BS I know JoAnne and she is the most fair minded person on the counsel, and has been f…


Posted 7 hours ago by Shane Marcus.

article: ‘Taken 3’ takes a wrong turn with no ch…

This is an opinion, nothing more


Posted 7 hours ago by Ed Walters.

article: Letter: No one’s faith should be scorned

Ben Franklin also said, The best way to keep a secret between 3 people is to dispose of the first two.



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists