Home > Perspective

Is our President a Mad Slasher?

by Conservativity Staff,
Originally Posted: 2/7/2005 10:36:11 AM

Today, our beloved president is submitting his latest budget to the Congress.  In this budget are fewer spending programs.  In fact, there are real cuts in programs, as opposed to the "cuts" that liberals normally deride, which in reality are smaller-than-expected increases in expenditures.  Over 145 programs are being completely eliminated, or at least radically reduced, in President Bush’s effort to trim spending.

Please realize that some of the savings are realized by taking multiple grant programs and consolidating them into one, to save administrative costs.  Example:  18 community-development block grant programs will be consolidated into one, saving about $1.8 billion per year.  Others are direct cuts to funding to the states.  Law enforcement grants to the states, down from $2.8 to $1.5 billion.  $4.3 billion in vocational education programs, eliminated.  The Amtrak subsidy?  Gone.  Defense programs were not spared, with cuts to the joiunt strike fighter, a stealth destroyer, and even missile defense.

"It is not the job of the United States of America to take money from one group and reroute it to another.  Nor is it the job of the United States of America to provide a bribepurse for members of Congress to "bring home the bacon" in order to, in essence, buy re-election votes."

Is our President a mad slasher, looking for any money anywhere to cut, in order to inflict the maximum amount of pain on the American People?  Of course not.  He is faced with a massive, overly bloated mega-bureaucracy, easily capable of gulping up every cent the government takes in, twice over.  Many, if not most, of the programs, are not needed at all, much less vitally needed.  Remember that the best government is as small as possible.  It is not the job of the United States of America to take money from one group and reroute it to another.  Nor is it the job of the United States of America to provide a bribepurse for members of Congress to "bring home the bacon" in order to, in essence, buy re-election votes.  These are going to be hard lessons to learn, both for the Congress, and the people who have been bribed.

Already we are hearing cries of outrage from farmers who are about to lose some subsidy money.  Remember that subsidy money is usually paid in order to encourage a farmer to not plant some of his or her land, or in the alternative, to cause the farmer to plant a less profitable crop on his or her land.  This money artifically lowers the price of some produce, usually in the name of conserving the quality of the soil, or remaining competitive when exporting our crops.  But, I submit that the subsidies are not as needed as they are being portrayed.  Farmers would be unwise to plant one crop until nutrients for that crop were 100% depleted.  If enough farmers stop planting the unprofitable produce, the natural forces of the market would cause the supply to adjust to the demand, to the point where enough farmers could make money by planting the crop in the proper quantities.

The government is not there to pay our way through life.  When they pay the way of some, they take money from others and return nothing for it.  People normally think that the rich are the ones who foot the bill, and so what.  This country made them rich and they should pay a larger part of their wealth because they have it to pay.  That is fundamentally unfair.  It is also fundamentally inaccurate.  Who pays these subsidies?  My late mother-in-law, who died at 62 without drawing a cent from Social Security after contributing nearly $100,000 over her career.  Those contributions are spent in the General fund, which means farm subsidies.

You also pay these subsidies as part of your income tax.  If your taxes were lower, you would have more money to spend.  Without the subsidy, the government has fewer employees.  Nobody is needed to manage a non-existent program.  Market forces do not require bureaucrats to manage them, hence they are more efficient regulators of the economy.  Of course, the elite left, whose sole purpose in life is to exert control over others they believe incompetent to control their own lives, is apopleptic over losing these puppet strings.  However, they have, as Rush has said, painted themselves into a corner.  They have through the election demanded "sacrifice" from the people. 

Our president has given them the sacrifice they asked for, although in a different form.  The lefties wanted to hike taxes on the productive, but keep all of their control mechanisms in place, ready and waiting for the next Castro-worshipping socialist president (as if that person will ever come).  Our president decided to cut subsidies and programs, and hence the size of government!  Bravo!

George W. Bush is not a mad slasher.  He is a masterful manager, who by every move he makes shows that he earned his Harvard MBA.  Prepare yourself for more prosperity.