HERE AND NOW. I believe that Romney's nomination of Paul Ryan is good for America, and really for the world, no matter who wins this election. And here's why.
We are stuck. Three separate bipartisan Congressional committees have studied the issue of our government's fiscal policy, and they have all basically agreed that the same things need to happen. First, taxes are going to have to rise. The rich particularly will need to pay more. Several tax loopholes will be closed. But probably, tax rates across the board will rise. Second, costs are going to need to go backward. Medicare benefits will need to be scaled back. The retirement age will rise. Entitlements generally will need to be scrutinized and rationalized. The military probably will need to be more efficient. And here's how much of that we are currently doing: none.
And we're not considering any of this, because we're stuck. The Left won't help with cutting programs, and the Right thinks tax raises are absolutely unacceptable. Something has to give.
The problem is that there is no "political will" in Washington, which basically means that there is no "political will" in the population (in us).
But the next two months should change that. Ryan's nomination will surface a serious debate about fiscal policy, and perhaps the political will can change, regardless of who is elected.
Welcoming thoughts. Here and now.
I turned 35 this year and decided to throw my hat into the presidential race. Will you run with me?
I hope you're right. Part of me is skeptical we'll have that balanced and difficult discourse. I kind of feel like the Super Committee had a once in a lifetime oppty to implement Simpson Bowles but took the easy way out in the face of a potential default on US debt. So I'm skeptical the system will allow real discourse this election -- esp with all the SuperPAC money trying to "energize the base." I really hope I'm wrong here.
I think that Ryan and the conservative base would consider tax hikes if and when there are genuine reductions in spending. Historically spending cut promises are put on the back end of immediate tax hikes, and then never happen. So as a conservative, I strongly oppose tax hikes because of this pattern. Ryan brings in the energy and argues his case well - I see the possibility of fiscal restraint. Imagine what Reagan could have accomplished if along with his stimulus of tax cuts he had also had the fiscal restraint he argued for. Things went so well with only half of his ideas bearing fruit. With Europe falling apart perhaps what we see there, plus a great man like Ryan at the plate, we may see what Reagan did not... spending controlled for the first time since I set foot on this great country 35 years ago.
I am enjoying reading the political discussion but would like to see it expanded to issues other than the economy, as important to all of us as that is. I believe there are deep divisions between the "liberal" and "conservative" viewpoints concerning a host of themes, such as environment, health care, women's concerns, and more.
Fantastic idea, Sue! That's what Harnu is all about. Perhaps later tonight I'll grab an article and get another conversation going. Assuming you'll participate?