When making a budget, it becomes a bit problem when the money going out is greater than the money coming in. Because our politicians do not understand this, the size of our national debt is inconcievable. This morning, I read a small blub in our newspaper about a bill proposed by a legislator in Texas:
from the Star-Telegram Sunday, January 18, 2009, p 5B (by Maria Recio, Anna M. Tinsley, Dave Montgomery, Aman Batheja)
Rep. Kay Granger says she wants to help people out during these tough economic times.
Granger, R-Fort Worth, signed on to a bill by Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Tyler, to give taxpayers a two-month reprieve from paying federal taxes.
"I think this is a practical solution," Granger said. "Not every option has to include spending billions of dollars. I think most Americans would be surprised at the amount they could save if they didn't have to pay federal taxes for two months."
So, if the revenue from income taxes goes down by one-sixth, the government's spending should decrease by a proportional amount. Has anyone heard of the federal government cutting spending? I've only heard about bailouts for the financial and automotive industries as well as a hefty economic stimulus plan in the works. Am I mistaken, or does this plan make no sense? I don't see much difference in spending extra money and spending the same while earning less. It seems like the end result will be the same- more debt. What do these legislators gain from this bill? Approval from voters? Maybe we should all agree to pay more taxes to reduce the national debt with a strong limit placed on government spending. It seems practical to me, but unlikely to ever happen.