#219 Stimulus Check

Rose Marie Berger had a great response to the stimulus checks that were issued last year, and I'm only getting around to posting it now. I don't agree with all of her politics so I've just copied the choicest morsels here.

She begins here letter to the U.S. Treasury:

"Dear Sir:

On May 9, 2008, I received an “economic stimulus payment” from you for the amount of $600.00. I’m concerned that I received this check in error. As I understand it, you are $9 trillion in debt... The money you gave to me was borrowed against your debt... If I have received this check in error, please let me know and I will return it to you immediately. Otherwise, I will assume that you are continuing a bad habit of 'robbing Peter to pay Paul.'

Sincerely Yours,

Taxpayer XXX-XX-1234
Rose M. Berger
Washington, D.C."

Berger seems to not have a problem with the spending so much as with what the money is being spent on. Though the sections I've pasted seem to criticize spending financed by debt in general, her real concern is for the poor, the homeless, and even endangered species.

I, on the other hand, take issue with returning cash to any voters (not to mention polar bears) who demand goods and services from the government and don't expect to have to pay the big bucks those services require. On the left, they ask for the welfare state. On the right, they want a very expensive war or two, and an overinflated defense budget. One is a statism of domestic control. The other is a statism of nationalistic hegemony. One vision is of the nanny state. The other is of big brother.

I've posted a chart before that shows that the vast majority of our spending goes toward three things: War (a service demanded by the Right, generally), Entitlements (a service demanded by the Left, generally), and Debt (the only way to fulfill the demands of both right and left given limited tax revenues).

These expenses are partially financed through tax revenues and partially financed by further borrowing, via the issuance of U.S. Treasury notes. When spending exceeds revenues, the excess, by definition, increases our national debt. The problem on both the left and right is that they want to have their cake and eat it too. Neither is willing to admit that what they demand is going to cost them and that they have to be willing to fork it over. And until both sides are willing to rethink their expensive ideologies, they're both going to keep taking it up the ass every April 15th.

#218 Interesting Links XXVI

Michael Spencer posts on stuff he was glad Jesus chose to deal with while he was here.

Halden Dorge on The Martyr vs. The Fighter

Miroslav Volf on divine judgement.

My state, Georgia, has passed, or at least tried to pass recently, some laws regarding baggy pants. I think that's retarded, and James Hanley helps point out why. Truly, one of the critical issues of our time.

The Hannity-Palin infomercial cracked me up. Clearly, Sean is not quite as skilled as Billy Mays (of Oxyclean fame) at selling a product. Then again, Mays had far superior and useful product to work with the Sean did. So we'll let him slide on that one.

Ben Witherington posts on the ideology of security, an article I haven't actually read yet. But the topic has been in my head for a couple of years now.

Jason Kuznicki points out some eerie similarities between fascist Italy of the early 20th century and modern America. As if there weren't enough already.

Interested in social change, but Jim Wallis and the like leave a bad taste in your mouth? Davey Henreckson points us to an article proposing the writings of John Howard as a critique and alternative.

A former hedge fund guy says goodbye to it all, and has some advice involving The Marijuana among other things.

You might be surprised at what Adam Smith had to say about "spreading the wealth."