creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Steve Chapman
Steve Chapman
19 Feb 2012
China as Punching Bag

Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping came to the United States last week, and that set alarm bells clanging. … Read More.

16 Feb 2012
Food and Conscience

Factory farming and its abuses were once the province of an eccentric minority that invited ridicule and scorn.… Read More.

12 Feb 2012
False Fears About a Nuclear Iran

"The stupidest thing I have ever heard." — Meir Dagan, former head of Israel's intelligence agency,… Read More.

The Truths Behind the Tea Parties

Share Comment

The banking collapse and the economic meltdown have prompted many Americans to turn to the federal government as indispensable savior, telling Congress and the president: We hope you can fix it; we want you to do whatever is necessary to fix it; and we don't care what it costs.

That was not the sentiment in evidence at the tea party protests held on Tax Day.

There, the message was one of great skepticism about the efficacy of the government's remedies and great apprehension about the expense (along with some of the extremist lunacy that accompanies any mass movement). The scale of the federal response to the crises has come as a frightening surprise to many Americans, who suspect the cure will be worse, and less transitory, than the disease.

Since last September, a federal budget that was already growing steadily suddenly accelerated out of control. The ride began in the winter of 2008, when Congress and President Bush agreed on a fiscal stimulus package of $170 billion in tax rebates and incentives. It picked up speed in the fall, when the Treasury spent $85 billion to take over insurance giant AIG and Congress approved $700 billion to rescue failing financial institutions.

By the time Barack Obama took office in January, projected federal outlays for this year had soared by nearly $1 trillion over last year, and the budget deficit had nearly quadrupled. But was that enough? Not nearly. Obama saw Bush and raised him, immediately pushing through another fiscal stimulus program with a price tag of $787 billion.

Fiscal hawks thought the budget was out of control before. Now they look back on the pre-2008 profligacy as a golden age of budgetary restraint.

The amount of money involved in all this would be staggering to anyone not benumbed by the incessant torrent of bad news. But judging from the tea party protests, the numbness is not universal. No matter what the state of the economy, some Americans are still capable of being shocked to see trillions of federal dollars pouring out like water rushing over a broken dam. And like many reputable economists, they suspect most of it will be wasted.

The invocations of the Boston Tea Party — on April 15, no less — suggested that the protests stemmed from anger about taxes under Obama.

But Obama has not actually increased income taxes — only the federal tax on tobacco, which the majority of people don't pay. His tax plan calls for cutting income taxes for most Americans, and not raising them on the rest until 2011.

So why did people rally across the country when they should have been planning how to spend their tax refunds? Because their true dismay is about the mushrooming of federal outlays, which the demonstrators regard as a future tax increase in the making. Which, of course, it is.

The problem is not just the spending supposedly needed for the current economic emergency. Obama claims that he will cut the deficit in half, to $533 billion, by the end of his first term. Two problems: 1) The Congressional Budget Office says the more likely number is $672 billion, and 2) that is 46 percent more than the deficit in 2008. Worse yet, the CBO says the deficit will then resume its upward trajectory, reaching $1 trillion by 2018 and nearly doubling the national debt over the next decade.

The realism about expenditures is the encouraging thing about the protests. It's easy to convince people that the government should take less of their money. It's harder to persuade them that the government should provide them less in the way of benefits and services. Yet the teabaggers took the view that whatever Washington plans to provide, they don't want — not at this price, anyway.

The country has gotten into a painful fiscal predicament because both parties have let us believe we can have more and more goodies from Washington at no additional cost. The recent explosion of federal spending has succeeded in one way: It has exposed that assumption for the fiction it was.

Like Bernie Madoff's investors, we now face the bleak truth that the comfortable future we expected is gone. Everything the federal government is doing will be forcibly extracted from our future earnings. The tea party protesters see that and are angry. Can the rest of the country be far behind?

Steve Chapman blogs daily at newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/steve_chapman. To find out more about Steve Chapman, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.


Comments

1 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;... If you subtract the matter of of interest, which is breaking the society, and not just the government; then what society costs is what it costs...If the price of medical care is paid by employers, or individuals, or by the government the price is going to be the same, and perhaps a great deal higher because it is not mandated toward prevention and common sense care....The price of defense is going to be the same whether it is paid forward, or paid later...If the people bear the price of taxes, or the rich pay their share, the cost will be the same, if not a great deal higher because it is costing the poor their lives, their futures, and the capital of generations....If the rich paid all the taxes on property and wealth they would spread it around, but also make certain that their government did not throw it away... When all taxes are sucked out of the hides of the poor, then there must be enough of them to pay, or all the costs neglected on one day will wait for another day, with costs rising instead of falling...No matter what, the legitimate costs of government are not made less but greater, by neglecting its responsibility, or putting them off for another day...Justice, welfare, tranquility, and union are legitimate goals of government... What kind of idiot thinks the society suffers less costs from injustice, from welfare rich, from discontent, or disunion??? The tax structure is designed to make the poor poorer, and keep the rich, rich.... It was never supposed to be that way... The amendment legalizing income tax has grown to cover the poor, but it has not given them equal rights with the rich... Bleeding them dry has not given them the ability to defend their rights, so even while their wages were taxed they had no power to protect their jobs...Left to decide for themselves whether to buy native or foreign they let their paychecks decide, and have been made the agents of their own destruction.... And why??? If they ever had charge of their own affairs; does anyone believe they would vote to compete with slaves???Instead of freeing the world we have worked at making ourselves slaves...It is only because the great rights of the rich that were theirs out of prejudice, but also out of respect for the fact that property paid the full support of government remained with them while the weight of the country was loaded onto labor... I did not tea bag anyone...I would not mind paying taxes if the rights that should come with the obligation were mine...If labor must pay, it should be able to defend its jobs....In fact, all the legitimate obligations of government, as clearly stated in the constitution should be paid for, and they come at a cost... That cost will be worse if put off, or if neglected entirely...People still have to be supported in their society even if their jobs go to other lands...People still need to be supported even if all their property ends up in the hands of the rich.... The legitimate tasks of government still need to be pursued, and must be, even if government has given all public property and privileges to the the rich...Some body has to pay, or see the government unable to prop up the rich, and what the people are beginning to recognize, is that they cannot support useless rich and useless government... Sooner or later, if the goverment will survive, it will have to tax those with the wealth, because taxing the poor has only wrecked the country... Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:12 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Steve Chapman
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 27 Feb 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 20 Feb 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 19 Feb 2012

6 Nov 2008 The Audacity of America

25 Nov 2010 The Case Against Motorcycle Helmet Laws

24 Aug 2008 Gun 'Rights' Vs. Freedom