Gelles re: "Big problems can open the door to big solutions" -- said Dea

Dear John,

Having watched several U.S. House presentations on
CSPAN, regarding the debate about lowering taxes versus
increasing the national debt, I still am troubled.

As I said in a CITS Debt Watch, if we follow "tax reduction"
to the "limit" -- there will be no money for anything
provided by the government.

Yes.

I am aware that the "Republican agenda" is to reduce the
size of government by reducing taxes.

But.  That "spending economy," by the federal government, can
'only be achieved by cutting off the source of funds,' strikes
me as an act of "spiting your nose to save your face."

Look.

Are we saying that our elected are so stupid as to always
"tax and spend?"

We already have passed legislation to limit government
spending.

And, I agree, that the overrides of this legislation are
harmful to the economy.

But, I simply do not believe that cutting taxes is the
intelligent way to reduce government spending.  (There are
those who honestly believe that reduced taxes provide 
stimulus to the economy -- but -- I find, for example, the
fact that the elimination of $1's worth of income due to
eliminating the taxation of dividends is worth the $.09 of
stimulus that some project.)

So.

There simply has to be a better way to control government
costs without threatening future generations with increased
government debt.

I suggest that if Graham-Rudman legislation is inadequate,
that we revisit that!  Perhaps we make it too easy to
override that legislation?

Hell.  Let the government default, and see what happens.

Regards,

Curtiss
-- 


           W. Curtiss Priest, Director, CITS
   Research Affiliate, Comparative Media Studies, MIT
      Center for Information, Technology & Society
         466 Pleasant St., Melrose, MA  02176
   781-662-4044  BMSLIB@MIT.EDU http://Cybertrails.org