Balancing the Budget with War

Balancing the Budget with War by Doug Chick If our country was broke and the government needed to raise taxes, which politician would do so and risk losing their jobs?  Not the congress, nor the senate and Im sure not the president after his father getting voted out of office. If I remember correctly, I believe that the government was screaming poverty right after the White House gave an advanced of 300.00 in taxes to all the taxes payers in the U.S. and was trying to access the Social Security Slush Fund. But then after being cornered the president said that he would only touch that money if there were a national emergency. Well, this country has certainly seen a few of those since that statement. 

Since then Ive read articles where a Federal Judge held the Secretary of the Interior in contempt for refusing to accountant for the whereabouts of all of the money they have in trusted to them for Native Americas. It seems that all the money that agency is in charge of is gone and they refuse to produce documents on where is went. There are other reports out and about where other government agencies that also cannot account for the monies that theyve been entrusted with. So to me at least, it looks like the White House has spent every penny that it had control over. 

I further asked myself, why arent the Democrats screaming bloody murder about what the Republicans are doing unless they also know that we are broke and dont want to be held accountable for it right before an election. My guess is that they helped cook the books like Enron did before the Bush administration took over and thats precisely why we have no money in the first place. Perhaps this is why Bush said that soon they will all speak in one voice. I believe soon means right after the November elections. 

Now we are back to the part about having to raise taxes without any politician losing their jobs for being incompetent or crooksWar! With a Harvard PHD economist on staff at the White House, using war to balance a budget probably seems very logical. Plus not many people are going to be too outraged if going to war is going to save them from dying by weapons of mass destruction. Well, if I thought having to pay a few extra shillings out of my paycheck would certainly be worth it not to be killed by Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Granted, Iraq is a threat that should have been removed two administrations ago, but politics once again failed us and now our children will have to pay for the continuing mistakes made by people that should have retired from politics many years ago. So the big question is, will the U.S. government be able to raise taxed high enough to fight a war, fix the economy and still continue to help finance such countries as Israel at 3billion dollars a year, or will working American have to find a second job.

Perhaps it would be better if the government would just admit that taxes have to be raised in the interest of America and save a whole lot of innocent people unnecessary misery. The worst that these politicians will have to suffer is not being re-elected and spending the rest of their lives on fat government retirements and book tours.

This is all of course conjecture mixed with my opinion and I can't back any of it up on paper. :-)