« National Debt Meter | Main | China loves U.S. debt; never mind the bluster »


The reason the pro-Reagan method is opposed (and the anti-Reagan method is supported) is the same reason communism is opposed (and capitalism is supported). Each sounds good in theory but doesn't work in practice. You pointed out the pitfalls that are sure to be exploited by unprincipled politicians. When politicians are involved words lose their original meaning and eventually mean the opposite. Eventually the capital budget will become the non-capital budget. Ex: tax cuts equal spending and tax increases equal savings.

I remain unconvinced.

A growing number of people share your view that it is impossible for the government to make a good investment. Fortunately for the country, that faction was only a tiny minority when Reagan was president.

As usual, loved the post. This blog (and others like it) needs to become more widely followed. In response to an "investment"? in education: education = a voting population better versed in financial matters. A voting population that better understands financial matters means more politicians who run and get elected on a pro-Reagan method base. In turn, the more "investment" style government spending which takes place, leading to larger future growth. Investments in education pay off in more ways than one.

I have always ascribed to the Adam Smith view of the necessity of Government in limited roles but do feel that investment in such defined roles of Government is critical to the long term success of the United States. I would also include investment in education, as another poster above mentioned, in the critical role of government. However, striking a balance between giving a motivated yet underprivileged student a modicum of help and the tendency to create "social engineering" due to mission creep gives me some amount of pause when sifting through possible scenarios.

The comments to this entry are closed.