EconomistMom.com
…because I’m an economist and a mom–that’s why!

EconomistMom.com

Putting Labels Aside

October 13th, 2010 . by economistmom

no-labels-bull

I’ve got a guest appearance on the No Labels blog today.  Check out the organization and their “statement of purpose.”

I like their banner statement–which is sort of a condensed version of their statement of purpose:

Put the Labels Aside. Do What’s Best for America.
We are Democrats, Republicans, and Independents who are united in the belief that we do not have to give up our labels, merely put them aside to do what’s best for America.

And here’s how I related my “Economist Mom” perspective on the federal budget deficit to the No Labels movement:

If we citizens could look beyond the partisan bickering and the clutching to the ideological but illogical positions typically exhibited by our “leaders,” then we might actually find that there is common ground in the common sense solutions that are no doubt “tough choices”—but are choices we must make as better parents who care about seeing that our kids get to the better place they deserve.

3 Responses to “Putting Labels Aside”

  1. comment number 1 by: Jim

    Thanks for your insightful research and writing.

    Think that reigning in future spending will be very, very difficult. As I understand it generally, the legislation passed by Congress often includes mechanisms that results in required growth in programs in future years. So prior legislation would dictate that there be certain increases in future budgets.

    From looking at military pay scales, there are automatic increases in pay just with passage of time [no promotions required].

    In theory it would be helpful to require a ‘zero based budget’ process. This would require that each and every expenditure be justified. Staffing levels would have to be justified. The full costs of outsourcing disclosed. No annual increases in pay by just staying in one’s job.

  2. comment number 2 by: AMTbuff

    I like Jim’s idea of cutting back public sector salaries and benefits until those employees quit their jobs at the same rate as in the private sector. Any lower quitting rate indicates overpayment.

  3. comment number 3 by: AMTbuff

    From your blog post:
    >borrowing for a flat-panel TV because you don’t have a job right now to pay for it . . . not so smart!

    Diane, I see Democrats’ stimulus spending exactly this way: borrowing from our children so that government employees can keep getting paid a few years longer before crisis forces them out of work. This is not so smart, as you say.

    The government needs to safeguard its future ability to borrow more than these workers need to avoid looking for new jobs. Finding a job now is tough, but it will be impossible when the real depression starts.

    The economy needs the stimulus of fiscal responsibility. Without that stimulus, people will correctly husband their resources for the coming financial storm. In the present situation, conventional stimulus operates as anti-stimulus.