Seth Sandronsky wrote: > As political elites rush in with tax dollars to bailout financial firms, > cities and states across the nation are cutting social spending due partly > to falling revenues from the collapsing housing bubble. My point? The > shibboleth that social spending harms the economy is alive.
These days, I don't hear that "social spending harms the economy." Rather, people point to budgetary issues: in simple accounting terms, an increase in social spending causes a higher government deficit and the vast majority of state and local governments can't run deficits (except for capital spending). Since there is so much opposition to raising taxes -- especially by the GOP -- something has to give. Given the lack of public support for social spending these days, it has to give. Of course, that's a disaster. At least in California, we need higher taxes, preferably on the rich. Now. -- Jim Devine / "Nobody told me there'd be days like these / Strange days indeed -- most peculiar, mama." -- JL. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
