WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network
WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network
WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network
Email: Password: Lost Password? | Register
MetroNews Mobile Get Our FREE RSS Feeds!
WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network
Ad Current Jobs!
Friday, November 20 2009
WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network
Click here for the GameNight site!
WVMetroNews - WV News, Talk and Sports Network News Sports WVU Sports Outdoors All Access Audio/Video Affiliates Advertising About Jobs Contact Search
11/04/2009
Hoppy Kercheval
Print this story
Hoppy's Commentary For Wednesday
Talkline Host Hoppy Kercheval

The parable tells us that a fool and his money are soon parted.  We are taught from childhood that absurd financial behavior will have consequences. 

True, not everyone gets the message, but the common instinct, even in children, is to be cautious with money.  The responsible realize that bank accounts run dry, loans come due and the job you have today may not be there tomorrow.

All of which makes it even more remarkable that the federal government has lost all sense of fiscal responsibility.  Consider these facts:

It took the country 200 years (1791-1982) to accrue a federal debt of $1 trillion.  Between 1982 and 2001 the debt rose to $5.7 trillion.  It doubled during the presidency of George Bush (2001-2009) to $10.6 trillion.

As of yesterday at 2 PM, the debt was $11,907,751, 071,362.30 and increasing at a rate of $3.8 billion a day. That’s $38,760 for every man, woman and child in the United States.

The Office of Management and Budget estimates government spending will add another $9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.  That means, according to the Congressional Budget Office, our annual interest payment on the debt will rise from $177 billion now to $799 billion in 2019.

Now, here’s the really frightening part.  The speed at which the national debt is growing is increasing.  Economist Robert Samuelson reports that President Obama’s planned budgets “would increase the debt-to-GDP radio from 41 percent in 2008 to 82 percent in 2019.”

There’s no hint of any course change.  The Wall Street Journal reported last week that House Democrats were passing a dozen spending bills that increased domestic spending by 12 percent. 

Washington has already borrowed and spent—or is trying to spend--$787 billion on a federal stimulus package.  We’re considering a massive overall of the health care industry that will cost around $1 trillion over ten years.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi continually repeats the mantra that the health care bill will meet President Obama’s requirement of not adding “one dime” to the deficit, a remarkable fiction that only the most gullible could swallow.

It feels as if we are caught in a cycle of spending that fuels itself.  Politicians exercise power by distributing money to constituents who then demand more services.  Politicians borrow from the future to pay for the ever growing list of benefits.

If the trend continues at current pace, at some point the strain on the nation’s finances will become too great.  Samuelson asked in a column this week if American might one day simply go broke.

“It’s still a very, very long shot,” Samuelson wrote, “but it’s no longer entirely unimaginable.” 

It’s more likely that Americans will be burdened with more taxes, higher interest rates and a sluggish economy.  There will be more ways that we will be parted from our money, even though we won’t have been the foolish ones.  


User Comments
Thornton,

I also believe ole Will said, "When you find yourself in a hole, quit digging".
I believe it was Will Rogers who said "A fool and his Money are soon elected."

That is also apropos.
I agree with BigBear, with 1 major exception, the FAIR TAX(do totally away with the IRS & Income Tax, then have a national sales tax on all new goods & services). check out FAIRTAX.org. To TD a tax on the wealthy will not help us get our house in order. Basic economics, the rich can only do 3 things with their money(other than give it to the gov), give it away, spend it or invest(which includes savings), which all 3 helps everyone. So the less money they give to the gov in taxes, the more money they have to help people.
Welfarworker...Thank you...that was very well said!!! It's because of fair-minded people like yourself that I can still hold-out hope that this nation will once again come together...not as Republicans or Democrats...or as conservatives or liberals...but...as Americans. Americans who love this nation enough to set aside their differences and together solve the problems that we ALL face TOGETHER. I can't believe that a true American would hope that a US President, any US President, would fail and our nation fail with him. Where's the winner in that scenario???? You get to post on some internet message board that you "told us so."
The problem is quite simple, the solution is nearly impossible. The problem is the whole idea of a "career politician". When someone makes a career out of being a politician they have a direct conflict of interest with doing the job they are elected to do because all they are focused on from day one is keeping their job. So they funnel money back to their home districts in order to "show" the people what a wonderful job they are doing and the people, in general, are dupped into believing them thus re-electing the same idiots to the same office over and over again.

The solution to this is three fold: 1) make the elected officials salaries up to the public that elected them. If you think your politician is actually doing a good job then give them a raise in between elections, if they are doing a crappy job you give them a pay cut.

2) Term limits on every single elected position. This is quite possibly the most important aspect. The politicians need to have a known end date to their time in office. If they don't have one then all of their focus is just on the next election they can't see anything past that. If they know that they only have one or two terms in office suddenly they will be able to see out into the future and attempt to have long term effects on government.

3) No longer allow actively sitting elected officials to run for any office when they are supposed to be on the job. Why should our tax dollars pay a salary to someone who is never on the job they were elected to do? If they want to campaign for another office they can do it on their time when they are on a recess or out of office. During the 2008 presidential race how many US Senators/Representatives were running for President? During the entire 1.5 year campaign cycle how many votes did they miss, or only vote present on? How many pieces of legislation did they actually author and not just sign their name on? The bottom line is that they were paid over $100,000/year to not do their jobs. This should not be allowed.

Now while those three things would probably help to solve our problems none of them will ever be enacted because the career politicians benefit without those items and they would have to vote and approve of those measures therefore we are completely and totally screwed.
Just a couple of thoughts. If we raise taxes to increase revenue how do we ensure that Congress will not just spend the money and not pay down the debt? Then are we truly better off? When you start raising taxes on those that are “better off” than most, where does it end? For someone making $50,000 a year that looks a whole lot better than someone making $25,000 a year, so that person making less will demand more from those making more. I would say that President Clinton had fewer challenges in his 8 years than President Bush did and even with a surplus, what did we accomplish? Did he fix healthcare, Medicare, Social Security and on and on, but that is another argument. We need to hold our legislators more accountable and fiscally responsible. We need to cut spending. It is easy to blame the President, but Congress controls the spending of our money so recklessly. As voters we have the power, exercise it.
Hoppy, in reading the postings to the moment each has several common themes: 1. Federal spending is out of control, and the Stimulus didn't put any jobs on Main Street. 2. Congress does not have the best interests of the electorate as their focal point, just more tax and spend legislation. 3. The West Virginia delegation is self-serving, conceited, one demensional, and in lock-step with Party policies. 4. If we don't do something soon, it's going to get a lot worse in West Virginia and the country.

Guess this wasn't the "change" that was promised. I know, West Virginia was not for Mr. Obama! But you did as you always do and returned the same "good ole boys" right back, as your Party instructed. Guess you haven't had enough. I know, Mountaineers are very tolerant and cannot be broken. My Grandmother taught me that when we lived in Kingwood in the 1950's. She was a true "Free-Stater of Preston!"

It's all politics now. It's not Government for the common good, it's governing by the Party mantra. Not pretty, is it?

No, TD is right.... Even the godfather of Reaganomics, Art Laffer, acknowledges the Clinton administration's strong fiscal stewardship.

What TD fails to mention is the efforts of the Gingrich-led GOP majority congress of '95/'96 that abolished welfare as a federal program and made significant cuts to Medicare and paved the way to a balanced budget and subsequent fiscal harmony.

Remember the elderly man at the town hall this summer who told congress to "Keep their government hands off my Medicare!"? Until the average voter no longer expects Social Security and Medicare as guaranteed right of citizenship, nothing will change, and Hoppy can cut and paste this commentary again in 2019.
Shao lung the fuzzy math is your misinterpretation of the surplus. there was indeed a surplus during the clinton administration. the surplus referss to taking in more than you are paying out not the public debt. yes there was debt during the clinton administration it was not increasing and was being paid down at the time. people use terms debt deficit spending and surplus interchangeably and incorrectly. consider you have an unpaid house, an unpaid car, normal household expenses and a job. the total on your house and car are your longterm debt. your job is your income. as long as your income is more than your expenses and you continue to pay them you have a surplus. you still have debt. if your income decreases below your expenses yet you continue to live the same lifestyle and buy more items on credit so to speak you have deficit spending. in either situation you will always have debt because you will always have expenses it is just a difference of the amount your short term and long term debt and how much you apply towards paying it down. that is basic economics in its most basic form. Captain Q apparently you can spend more than have since our Wall Street experience shows the way. Sam Peer sometimes politicians must do what is right rather than what is popular. it is a brave poilitician who can do that because it generaly spells the end of their political career.

people on this page regularly lament how the government spends "their" piece of the pie but i don't know many of them who would be willing to give back the benefits of the largesse received from the "corrupt" politicians. do you think the folks who have jobs in tucker county because of the foundation supported by Mollohan want to lose their jobs? would you like to return to the old days of 8 hour drives to charleston? are you willing to give up social security or pay medicare premiums based on your income to help solve the problem? are you willing to give up the services and tangible items we all get from government largesse? we vote people into Congress to make those decisions. not everyone will be happy with the decisions that are made. what i do know is that whenever a program or service is going to be cut everyone howls to the rafters about it. when someone takes a government funded project and picks out two lines of the project to explain it and make it appear meaningless we don't do our homework we just go with the sound bite. when we try to have civilized debate it turns into a mishmash of namecalling and distortions of the truth. we as a nation are becoming so polarized that we will conveniently ignore cold hard facts that don't fit in with our belief system. we are becoming more isolated, less caring, less educated, more jingoistic and certainly less tolerant for all that we have elected a biracial president. it is time to look at things factually, to give consideration to the other sides viewpoint and become a great nation again.
A couple of questions for EriS and JAWVMM

First, the US Constitution is a legal document. It is the supreme law of the land and sets the authority the federal govenrment has. Would you show me where it is found that the Federal Government has the authority to spend taxpayer dollars on healthcare, energy, education, and a whole varity of other items it spends on and taxes for.

Secondly, I would like for you to explain to me what right you or anyone else has to use the force of government to extort the fruit of my labor to give distribute to another. Explain to me the morality of using the Federal government to force me to pay for another's healthcare.
I think, given the track record of quoted sources, that we could probably assume the GDP projections you quote start at one of the worst economic periods in American history and project from there. At least all of the similar projections of the same tone that I have seen have used this particular misrepresentation. You speak of the estimate of a health care bill without noting that the OMB, as it itself notes, cannot include certain benefits due to statutory requirements, benefits which it says are very likely there. We pay Hoppy, we all pay for health care bankruptcies. You are quick to point this cost sharing out when it involves a tax, well we all pay a HUGE health care tax right now, in everything we buy, in our credit card rates, in everything. This is why we are the only industrialized nation left who hasn't reformed or entirely avoided the kind of health care system we have. It's insane.

Finally, I notice we are now going to have a debate in WV over whether to engage in counter-cyclical spending. That's something supported certainly by a majority of economists. It's idiotic to talk of making "tough choices" when we're in a temporary and unpredictable slump which we have the money to smooth over and repay when times recover to their normal function. That is what a rainy day fund exists to do! It's simple economics, and something no market can do for itself.
OF COURSE you can spend more than you have; people, companies, and countries do it all the time. The average renter household in this country has debt payments of about 25% of income, down from a high of 31% in 2001. The average homeowner household has payments of almost 17%, just dropped from an all-time high of over 17% since 1980.

The key is not to borrow for something that depreciates or is consumed unless it generates income. We borrow mainly to buy houses and cars and to pay educational expenses. Businesses borrow to buy buildings, materials, and equipment. If you borrow to eat steak or buy a giant TV, you are eventually going to be in trouble. If you borrow to go to school or have transportation to work, that's different.

If the government borrow to spend on education and training, health, transportation, research, and other infrastructure that increases our productivity and competitiveness, we get a return on that investment.

The question should not be whether the government is borrowing too much, but whether what the money is spent for will increase prosperity (which is not necessarily best measured by the GDP.) We need to look at how the money is being spent, not how much of it is borrowed.

And, ShaoLung, it is not as if money paid in taxes is removed from the economy, any more than money you pay to a store is - possibly less, because some of the money you spend on consumer goods goes for imports. Money the government spends goes to people who can spend it in the store just like money from the "real economy."
Tax the rich????? We ALL got into this together. I say we have a flat tax. Everyone pays their share. No deductions or additions!!!! No low earned income credit and no tax credit and no taxing the rich.

If you do not have it do not spend it. Time to cut the handouts. Time to stop the me me me me attitude.
Poster TD is believing the lying liars fuzzy math on the "surplus" Clinton created - it existed on a piece of paper, created by accountants and was NEVER in the bank! The cold, hard financial truths are difficult for some of the ill-informed to swallow....and any REPUTABLE economist will agree....that "supply-side, or "trickle" down economics is the only method that WORKS-period. Take an Econ class, do the graphs, and you will see how truly simple it REALLY is! Furthermore, the Reagan era created jobs, and the Bush tax cuts benefited West Virginians like me; people who came from VERY POOR, working class background(I had one pair of new jeans every year in high school). However, I studied hard, made the right decisions and finally was able to EARN a little money in my life, that the government so graciously returned to me in the form of a tax "cut" during the Bush presidency. What did I do with the money? I invested a little more, spent a little more on my four kids, basically helped drive the local economy. What will happen if the Bush tax "cuts" are allowed to expire? The GOVERNMENT will get even more of MY hard-earned cash, there will be less spent on my family and less circulating in the true economy....and the Washington fat-cats will re-distribute my personal "wealth" to inane ideas like health care 'reform" and the "economic" stimulus - which does nothing but add up to more debt for generations of future Americans. Take a look around people....China and India are buying huge gold reserves and dropping American currency...why? Because it is a bad, poorly managed investment. VOTE THE SITTING CONGRESS AND SENATE OUT OF OFFICE AND TAKE THIS GREAT NATION BACK!
CaptionQ laments that no one in Washington is going to do anything other than make the problem worse. He's right to a degree, however, I would like to offer something for everyone's consideration. Government draws it power from the people. We have and have always had the ability to change our leaders, though the election process. Yet, look at where we find ourselves today. We are 11.9 trillion dollars in debt. Government on all levels intrudes into almost every fascet of our lives. We presently find ourselves in a recession caused by governmental meddling and votebuying. We find ourselves in a war the seems to have no end and the list atrocities can go on and on.

I submit that we have allowed this to happen. Consider the situation here in West Virginia. One of the 15 most corrupt individuals in congress is none other the Congressman Mollohan. He is being investigated for stearing government contracts to major compaign supporters. This is no new revelation, it has been going on for sometime, yet he continues to be reelected. Remember he is using the tax dollars you and I pay to reimburse his friends for favors. He using money the we earned and the government extorted to buy votes and favor.

Then we have Jay Rockefeller who votes to take this nation to war in Iraq only to back peddle when the going got rough. The result is an ongoing mess that costing billions of taxpayer dollars and placing in harms way many thousands of men and women. Jay Rockefeller did this for no other reason than go with the political wind. He is driven by the polls and populatity, not by ethics and sound governance.

One additional item to consider with regard to Mr. Rockefeller is that even though the state overwhelmly supported Clinton during the presidentual primary, Mr. Rockefeller used his super delgate status to support Obama. Look where that has got us, coal, which this state depends on is under attack, by the very administration Rockefeller supported. Mr. Rockefeller supported an adminsitration hostile to this state even though that was opposite the will of the citizens of this state. Yet, this man will be reelected by the very people he is hurting.

Then we have Mr Byrd, whose is considered all but a god in West Virginia. It is very seldom I speak to anyone who won't tell you all the good Byrd has done for West Virginia. Yes, Mr. Byrd has brought alot of tax dollars back to the state, in the form of roads, schools, and government entities he has caused to be moved tot he state. However, all the roads, schools, and such mean nothing if building them bankrupts the nation. Yes, I like driving on Corridor H, but it is worthless if I can't afford to drive because I can no longer afford the taxation necessary to support and build such things. All the items Mr. Byrd has brought to the state serve no purpose if prople no longer have work because the government has taxed business to the to the point they either have folded or moved out of the country.

We could go further and discuss some of the messes both Captio and Rahall have supported, but time and space won't allow it. We have no one to blame but ourselves for the point we find ourselves today. We have elected these people time and again. We have treated them like royality or gods, when they aren't. We are a nation that was founded on items like personal accountibility and self governance. Our founders feared government and rightly so. It is time we returned to our roots and founding principles. The very first thing we need to do is remove from office the present gaggle of career politicans and replace them with men and women than cherish free markets and liberty. Until we do, what we see today, the corruption, the irresponibility, the government interference, the extortion of the fruit of one's labor to support the votebuying of the politicians, and lose of liberty is going to be the norm.
The question for you Hoppy is this. Could you support higher taxes on the wealthy if it means we can get our financial house in order? Or, will you keep espousing Reagonomics as a workable economic theory even though the country may go bankrupt? Of the 12 trillion dollar debt we now face, 10 trillion can be blamed squarely on Reagonomics. The debt was 1 trillion when Reagan took office, 4.6 trillion 12 years later, the end of Bush's term. Clinton inherrited a 300 billion deficit, we got away from Reagonomics and even though the debt increased by 1 trillion while he was in office we had a surplus of 260 billion when he left and it looked as though we had turned things around. Not to mention that the economy grew at a terrific rate which should dispell the theory higher taxes on the wealthy hurts the economy. Allan Greenspan warned, "we have to be careful not to pay the deficit off too quickly", the dumbest thing I ever heard. I told you in 2000 that electing Bush would mean a return to Reagonomics and a return to deficit spending. With a Republican House, Senate and President Reagonomics was back in full force and the defict doubled in 8 years with no protest from the right wing at all. Obama walked through the door facing a trillion dollar deficit and an economy on the brink of collapse, thanks to more Reagan theories like de-regulation. The post WWII years, 1945-1980, we had a top income tax rate of 70%, on income over $500,000 in todays dollars. Right now it is 35%. Obviously cutting spending is necessary but the top tax rate has to go back up, Clinton had it at 39% but it needs to go higher, maybe 45%. That's the only way we're going to keep from going broke. You have the microphone and the citizens of this state will listen if you speak up.
Hoppy, the bottom line is you can't SPEND more than you HAVE, PERIOD! Individuals have to live by this rule, but apparently the Federal Government can't. Bush II's Trillion dollar TARP program was bad enough, but now Obama's PORK-ulus program, health care reform (a.k.a. ObamaCare/Government-controlled health care), Cap & Tax/"War on Coal and other big spending bills are making the Federal Deficit EVEN BIGGER! Sooner or later, China's going to stop buying our debt and want repayed for their investment. Where will the money come from? How about Social Security and MediCare? With all that 'reserve' money already spent, where will the cash to pay all those benefits come from? I'm beginning to believe NEITHER political party has the answers to this problem. The Obama Administration's philosophy seems to be 'saving' money by spending MORE money and hoping the deficit shrinks magically. This won't work, no matter what all the Obama supporters say.

Bottom line, America is in SERIOUS financial trouble and no one in Washington's going to do a thing about it (except make the problem WORSE). God help us all.

Post Your Comments
All comments are moderated before showing up on the site. Comments are only reviewed for inappropriate language and libelous or damaging comments. Read full user policy here.

You must be a registered user to post commments. Please login or register to post a comment.
Click Here to simply send a private email to Hoppy about this article (comments will not be posted on the website).




WVMetroNews