http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=515

As for the deficit… I agree, we shouldn’t be deficit spending. We should be on a plan to reduce and ultimately eliminate all Unconstitutional federal spending. The cost of Constitutional spending, including the war in Iraq – something the federal government has explicit, exclusive control over, is about $951 billion of the projected $3091 billion budget and that’s including whatever pork is part of things like the transportation bill, so it’s actually lower than that if we eliminate the pork too. Unconstitutional spending, including education, health, retirement, agriculture, etc totals about $1826 billion. Remind me again… which is the real problem, the war spending or the runaway entitlement spending?

And if we have a deficit so large, what are we doing spending $100 million a week in Iraq?

In 1965, we began spending the excess Social Security taxes to cover the budget debts already being caused after just 2 years of Medicare/Medicaid and it got worse from there with the addition of the Great Society programs to fight a never-ending “War on Poverty.” We’ll be forced to either dramatically raise taxes on current workers (making it pointless to work) or drop benefits for people receiving Social Security.

The Soviet Union collapsed under its own economic weight… and while we’ve managed to delay that collapse, the US is facing the same future because we have the same fundamental problem – too much government interference in the economy in an attempt to provide services to everyone.

The Great Depression happened because of the exact opposite reason – too little government regulation in the economy resulted in people like Charles Ponzi scamming millions from others. We created the SEC in response and years early, wrote the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. Those are great examples of the federal government using its power to regulate interstate commerce (the actual purpose of the interstate commerce clause).

The programs created from the New Deal and Great Society are blatantly Unconstitutional and violate the very notions this country was founded on. The last thing the framers wanted was a distant government telling you what you could do, how you can live your life, what doctor you could see, how much it was going to take from you, etc. The new the consolidation of power would breed corruption and that’s why the Constitution was written by specifically enumerating the powers of government rather than listing what the government couldn’t do.

Article I, Section 8 clearly defines the powers of the federal government… and I don’t see retirement, health care, education, etc in there anywhere… do you?

Right before the Great Depression.

If I said “everyone over 18 must buy and maintain at least one firearm and purchase at least 100 rounds of ammo per month to ensure their physical safety,” you’d see the problem with mandating expenditures. Oh sure, I don’t force you to buy a high end rifle with expensive ammo, but I’m forcing you to buy something you don’t want because it falls in line with my beliefs.

The government created the high cost of health care with the introduction of Medicare and Medicaid. Seeing an immediate spike in the cost of health care and a drop in those who could afford it, rather than end the interference which caused the problem, the government then created the HMO industry… which in turn only caused the price to spike more with more people unable to afford to see the doctor. So, here we are again with the same question. Mandate yet more insurance, which will increase the price even further and make it harder for young working adults to make ends meet, or reduce the interference with medical care.

Government, especially the federal government, is not a service industry. Can you find me any authorization in the Constitution which allows them to institute national health care plans, Ponzi retirement schemes, allows them to dictate what/how your local school districts can teach, etc?

Telling poor people, including poor black people, that you think so little of them that they can’t take care of their health care just pushes them further down the road to government dependence rather than self-responsibility. Are health care costs an obstacle? You bet… but it’s an artificial obstacle created by 45 years of government interference in the industry. The solution isn’t more government, but rather less.

As for the reference to Governor Paterson, I like to tie things in together so we see the hypocrisy of what people do and say… and how all that really matters to many people is who said it rather than the validity of the message. If people spent a little more time thinking about things for themselves rather than simply cheerleading for their team, we’d all be far better off. That goes for liberals, conservatives or any other group.

Phantomlord, at least you gave Obama credit for saying the same stuff, but you then asserted that Obama advocates “piling on more socialism” as a remedy. Funny, but I don’t recall Obama once using the term “socialism” so I’m not sure what you’re referring to. The only thing that remotely comes close to this asssertion is that, in Obama’s opinion, tax benefits and government programs should be re-structured so that it rewards balck fathers who “do the right thing” and be responsible fathers. That doesn’t sound too socialistic to me; it sounds like smart government.

Obama sought those radicals out and has some ’splaining to do.