I don't really like politics. It seems our country was founded by "statesmen": men who served in a difficult job for little in return as a matter of service. That doesn't seem to be the case, currently.
With all of the conflicting messages and opposing points of view, it seems like the major lesson is lost. To me, it is the title of the thread. Whether it be a person, business or government, spending more money than you have or make doesn't work. Credit may be a stop-gap measure for extreme circumstances, but in the long run you should always spend less than you make. But taking a broad view of individual lives all the way to what the government can do, it seems we all want more than is feasible. I admit, I am not immune. I wish I was. What if the real answer, instead of arguing over policies and ideas, was that each person owned up to his or her person and was responsible? I will re-emphasize in case anyone missed it - I am not even close to doing it right. I started my debt with student loans, getting an under-graduate then masters. I did work 30 hours a week through college, but I was foolish and didn't put that money in the right place (though I did ski a lot...). I then got some debt from a car loan because I wanted a reliable vehicle when I should have been driving a beater, etc. But, I've learned my lesson and am trying to live in a mature way - spending less than I make.
Do you know how bad the U.S. debt situation is. Here is a comparable analogy. If the U.S. were a person, he would be earning $55,000 a year. He spend $96,000 - meaning he creates $44,000 a year of debt for himself. He currently has a total of over $300,000 in debt. So if you met this "person", and he acted like making $55,000 and continuing on his current spending schedule was fine, what would you say?
The point is, we as individuals are rarely better than the government. Personally, many of us want a nicer house and better car than we can "afford" and want more comfort and nice things than is smart. Note, I put "afford" in quotes. Afford is not the ability to make a credit card, car or house payment. "Afford" is living well below our income so that we can provides for ourselves and others. The "others" part in that last statement is pretty important. What if instead of having a car payment of $400 a month, that was given to a charity of your choice? What if the country's budget wasn't three trillion dollars because people were taking responsibility for their neighbor, instead of relying on the government to do it?
I guess all the rambling above is to say that a reality check is what we need for 2012 - not a man or group of people with some master plan. We can't continue to spend the way we are, and in order to not do so, it is going to hurt - a lot. When I had a huge hospital bill I couldn't pay earlier this year, I was so grateful that a large portion of it was forgiven by the hospital. So, don't hear me jumping first in line to say you can cut all benefits I get from the government (though I am also young compared to most who receive benefits like Medicare and Medicaid). I don't want to be a huge hypocrite, and that certainly would be. But, what I am saying is that the only way out of this disaster of an economy we have is sacrifice and pain. There isn't another way. You can make money materialize. So, who can best solve that is the real question. The problem is, it isn't the president, regardless of which man gets the most votes. It also isn't congress. What if everyone in America got their fiscal house in order? I bet it would do a lot more than any elected officials. I am nowhere close to having mine in order, but I am trying.
Thoughts?
