Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri

Opinion


EDITORIAL: By the numbers

Thanks largely to economic growth spurred by the Bush tax cuts, the federal deficit continues to shrink significantly.

The Congressional Budget Office announced last week that the deficit for the fiscal year that ends Sept. 30 will be about $158 billion, well below the $250 billion recorded the previous year.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: Another baseless attack on public workers
  • EDITORIAL: Castle doctrine
  • EDITORIAL: Fired up over local shooting park
  • EDITORIAL: Islamic intimidation trumps liberty again
  • LETTERS: Regents' budget finally reflects reality
  • FROM OUR READERS: Not all Sun City Summerlin residents are NIMBYs
  • LETTERS: FAA's safety standards rigorous
  • EDITORIAL: Never mind
  • EDITORIAL: School funding, choice and results
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Inflation running 5.6 percent ... and other nonsense



  • Nevertheless, the head of the CBO said future efforts to control the deficit remain "daunting" because of a handful of factors.

    He's correct.

    In addition to uncertainty over the current credit crunch and the wildly fluctuating stock market, the Democratic Congress has threatened to let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010, which could undermine the economic progress the country has enjoyed in recent years.

    Too, the Democratic presidential candidates all seek to impose their own, expensive version of socialized medicine on taxpayers. Make no mistake: Allowing the government to essentially nationalize one-eighth of the nation's economy won't result in deficit reduction.

    Other looming problems include the inability of Congress to address the soaring costs of entitlement programs, which threaten to bankrupt the country. "We are on an unsustainable fiscal path," said CBO Director Peter Orszag, citing future Medicare and Medicaid obligations.

    And let's not forget federal spending. Whether Republicans or Democrats control Congress and the White House, federal outlays continue to skyrocket. No prescription for long-term fiscal solvency will ever succeed without spending restraint.

    "Congress has an opportunity to rise to the occasion and work with my administration to accomplish a balanced budget without raising taxes," the president said in response to the new deficit numbers.

    But why aren't we optimistic that this Congress will embrace lower taxes, entitlement reform and fiscal discipline in its efforts to trim the federal deficit?



    Leave Your Comment 23 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    David wrote on September 24, 2007 10:56 PM: "Growing at a slower rate" is not the same as "shrinking."


    Randy wrote on August 28, 2007 11:37 AM: Tim - my father fought in WWII and a cousin who died in Viet Nam. I support the soldiers who are only doing their duty. I do not support the jackasses who get us into a war (police action) that benefits no one but the Military-Industrial complex. Wars that mean absolutely nothing to America. I am surprised with your being able to discern b.s. from anyone. You are in it up to your armpits if you buy anything that the Bush administration has been shoveling.

    JJ - the AQ are alive and well. The only people who are running are the religious militants who are fighting each other. The Catholics and Protestants have been fighting since the Diet of Worms (in 1521) - do you think that Iraq is going to be any different?


    Steve wrote on August 27, 2007 06:44 PM: Mike: BRAVO! BRAVO!

    Finally, someone else who "gets it". Too bad Randy, ripmondo, Russ, et al will forever remain too ignorant to understand anything requiring common sense and logic. All they can do is regurgitate their extreme left-wing liberal hate mongering garbage.


    tim wrote on August 27, 2007 04:48 PM: hey randy my father fought in korea, my wifes uncle died in vietnam and my closest freinds have their kids in iraq fighting for your right to spew your b.s. i hope you sleep well at night knowing someone else is protecting your sorry butt.


    tim wrote on August 27, 2007 04:46 PM: hey randy my father fought in korea, my wifes uncle died in vietnam and my closest freinds have their kids in iraq fighting for your right to spew your b.s. i hope you sleep well at night knowing someone else is protecting your sorry but.


    J Johnson wrote on August 27, 2007 03:26 PM: Leave it to lefties and Defeatocrats to find something negative to say about a rapidly decreasing budget deficit and the booming economy that is behind the decrease.

    And of course Iraq has to be tossed into the fray for good measure! "Look at Iraq" one says. Well, last I checked the surge was working and AQ is on the run and the Iraqi parliament is making headway on political benchmarks even while they are out of session. Meanwhile OUR Congress is doing nothing but whine about their 12% approval rating...I wonder why?


    Randy wrote on August 27, 2007 03:06 PM: Tim

    Since you feel that the war in Iraq is just and proper, I suggest that you and all relatives 18-40 fly to Baghdad and join the war.


    Mike wrote on August 27, 2007 02:51 PM: Just to clear things up a bit. The "Clinton economy" was mostly the result of the earlier Reagan tax cuts and the peace dividend, also a Reagan accomplishment. Supply side economics has been proven to work. Tax cuts bring in more revenue than tax increases because they lead to an expanding economy. The real challenge is how to allocate those revenues to the betterment of all. One more quick comment, the bottom half of income tax payers account for less than 2% of total revenues. A pretty good start I think.


    tim wrote on August 27, 2007 02:33 PM: it does not matter who controls congress, neither party knows fiscal restraint and until voters from both partys figure that out well keep getting screwed. quit whining about the war,saddam disobeyed every u.n. resolution for ten years. he had it coming and we are the only ones who could it,in case you forgot we are at war with radical islam we win or we die.


    ripmondo wrote on August 27, 2007 02:07 PM: Heidi is right about the Congress' responsibility. But we are talking about the Repub Congress under Bush.
    I love how all the Repubs and Bush want to talk about fiscal responsibility after they needlessly got us into a trillion dollar war, gave tax cuts to millionaires, and spent money like there was no tomorrow.
    now Bush wants to cut back on all the domestic programs. Lets see....a trillion dollars for a country with 24 million people.....less than one tenth of the US. Your money down the drain.
    If you dont see this YOU ARE AN IDIOT. No two ways about it.


    Read All Comments