The LA Times is going out of their way to convince me that they know absolutely nothing about economics. Typical is how I describe their doomsday scenario that speaks of Trillions (with a T) in deficits, starving seniors, and an economy described as a 'house of cards'. The boogie man in this fable is none other than George W. Bush, and his 'massive' tax cut. Just when you thought they'd let this tall tale hit the presses without mentioning the fictitious 'social security trust fund', they mention that congressional plans would 'tap into the Social Security surplus'.

The LA Times rams this same story down the throat of their readers at least once a month, hoping that if repeated often enough, people will accept it as fact. I can only hope that readers will recognize it for just what it is. A big pile of shit.

The entire premise behind the LA Times' doomsday scenario, is that the economy will not grow, or will not grow as fast as government spending. Lately that has been all too true. Government programs have continued to get 6-8% increases in funding, even while gross tax receipts have been declining. Rather than cut spending or even suspend growth, liberals want to stick a gun in the face of hard working Americans, and tell them to dig a little deeper this year. Lawmakers and the media are so in favor of big government programs, that they continually mislabel spending increases as cuts, in hopes of swaying public opinion. Even programs that grow at double the inflation rate are called a 'cut' because they didn't receive the massive 8% increase that pork barrel spenders had hoped for.

What is needed, is for Congress to return to fiscal responsibility. Spending increases should be held to the inflation rate, or halted altogether during periods of negative or slow growth. As the economy turns around, and tax receipts start to increase, the deficit will be reduced and eventually eliminated. That is how we got the surplus in the first place. Democrats and some Republicans are impatient, however, preferring to hit taxpayers with a bigger tax bill rather than cut or halt the growth of big government programs. After all, you can't buy votes by cutting spending. I can only hope that voters realize that big government spending and higher taxes are never good for the economy.