- People will think nothing of watching a sixty second or even longer commercial as part of a TV show, but they won't sit still for anything over fifteen seconds on their computer...and then only if you include a little counter keeping them advised about how many more seconds it will be before they see what they clicked to watch.
- Most folks can drive a car and have conversations with passengers for hours without any real distraction, but put them on a cell phone, even a "hands free" phone, and wham! It is almost as bad as drunk driving suggest some studies.
- When milk hit $4.50 a gallon in some parts of the country this Spring, consumers screamed. But they'll think nothing of spending as much as $10 a gallon for bottled water that is no more healthy or safe than municipal water from the tap.
There's just a certain something that makes the activities different, and it works for opinions too. Why is it some folks are furious over the deficit spending of the Obama Administration, but stayed quiet for the 8 Bush years when the deficit grew by an average of $612 Billion a year, for a total debt growth of almost $5 Trillion, even with a GOP majority House and Senate for most of that time.
The reason all the folks screaming over the deficit now (the same ones attending the Tea Parties) didn't scream when it was Bush & Co. running up the deficit is because it was their side doing it and as long as it's their side then it's ok.
ReplyDeleteIt's called HYPOCRISY and both sides are eat slap up with it.
I love that exclusively Southern idiom "eat slap up with it"!
ReplyDeleteIt lends je ne sais quoi to the conversation... no?
Philosophically, I disagree with the precept that spending "must" drive our nation's economy, or perhaps more accurately, that spending must be the majority portion of our national economy. In large part, I trust that Mrs. Nall's perspective also.
Yet I also understand the dire predicament which this leading economic powerhouse is in, and which jeopardizes the world's security as well.
I hope I understand the balancing "act" the House does by examining future revenues and considering them against revenue growth - real and anticipated.
Yet, taking a "kitchen table" approach to the issue, how many families spend more than they make?
The family earnings - future and real - are a significant part of the trust that lenders have with their recipients for residences, automobiles and entrepreneurial loans.
Insurance is the hedge against that bet.
Nationally, we can't purchase insurance against the economy. (But AIG damn-sure tried, didn't they?)
More to the point, however, our economy must - I believe - reflect the average American's budgeting guide: Spend less than you earn, saving some for a "rainy day."
Analogously, I consider our budget's historical allocations, and wonder if we, by and through our elected officials were to return to those "days of yore" by taking the tough hits we should, to return our nation's fiscal ship of state to health. As it is now, our flotilla seems to be beam and berth below water.
What if, for example, China were to call due our indebtedness which they own?
We'd be screwed!
Again, philosophically, I believe the majority share of our nation's net value should be owned by "we the people," i.e., Americans, and that law should reflect that placement of importance.
Because laws encouraging free trade have opened the veritable flood gates of inexpensive/cheap foreign goods, exporting those same jobs overseas in the process, I think a serious re-examination of our trade balances and treaties with other nations would be in order.
By no means am I anti-free trade, yet I advocate for wise implementation, which I demur has been done.
KevinL....It is hard to save when the government continuously deflates the value of our currency by just printing more when they run out. Spend less than you earn and save up for a rainy day is sound advice....but how do you save money in the current atmosphere?
ReplyDelete