Historical Document

From The New York Times archives, David Frum writes on July 7, 1999 that the country needs to be more fiscally prudent:

It's time to blow the froth off the latte and make some prudent plans. Otherwise, the Government is going to find itself three or four years from now in the same jam as its citizens: pacing fretfully at 2 o'clock in the morning through a $100,000 kitchen renovation, wondering how on earth it talked itself into the delusion that it was going to finance its obligations with a big, soggy mass of Surplus.com shares.

Later, of course, Frum went on to work for the Bush administration where, in lieu of prudent plans, the decision was made to squander all the money in question on a set of giant tax cuts for rich people. Then to squander more money in a giant giveaway to drug and insurance companies. And to squander more money on a pointless and destructive war in Iraq. And more tax cuts! Always, always more tax cuts.

Comments

Good post, MY. This can't be pointed out enough.

Posted by Gore/Edwards 08 | January 21, 2008 12:48 PM

So, you finally get it?

The economy is going to be the deciding issue come November as voters pace nervously at 2 in the morning wondering if they will ever recover any of the financial security lost since Bush took office.

Posted by ken | January 21, 2008 1:10 PM

That's because, as we all know, if you tax people less, you get more money-because the American economy is the economic equivalent of a perpetual motion machine, and there are no laws of conservation that apply to money.

Posted by gerontion | January 21, 2008 1:13 PM

"More imperialism! More war for Israel! More big billion dollar gray yachts and 20 year olds coming home with PTSD or in bodybags!"

Can you hear the people crying for it? I KNOW David Frum can hear the people crying for it.

The people are also clamoring for more corporate control of the political system, and more inflation, (you know, so Joe Sixpack can try his hand at exporting all those goods he produces with his minimum wage service gig).

Posted by Murph | January 21, 2008 1:26 PM

Oh, and the people just LOVE them their new super consolidated crypto Zionist media, lying them into this war and that in the Middle East.

And how about that NAFTA! Good for the middle class all over!

Thanks, Bill!

Posted by Murph | January 21, 2008 1:38 PM

Matt -

No fair using people's own words against them. How could Frum have known when he wrote that article that some big, cushy political appointment was waiting for him, if he'd only play ball?

A man's got to eat, after all.

Posted by Jason Trigger | January 21, 2008 1:43 PM

Frum was merely channeling the economic thinking of Herr Doktor Greenspan: Republican deficits don't matter.

Posted by SavageView | January 21, 2008 1:59 PM

"Later, of course, Frum went on to work for the Bush administration where, in lieu of prudent plans, the decision was made to squander all the money in question on a set of giant tax cuts for rich people."

I find this misleading.

By Hilary Clinton's own data, suspending the Bush tax cuts will only give Washington an extra 50 billion dollars.

Yes, that sounds like a lot. But the US has a 13.3 trillion dollar economy.

Lets face it. Not extending the Bush tax cuts is more of a moral action against inequality than a constructive, pragmatic action.

Posted by thehova | January 21, 2008 1:59 PM

Instead of taxing people, the government should just write everybody large checks. This "negative income tax" will increase government revenues to the point at which no adminstration will ever have to worry about deficits again.

Posted by rea | January 21, 2008 2:24 PM

Well, in fairness, when he said "the Government", he was talking about a Democratic administration, and metaphorical surplus.com shares.
No one could have predicted "we'll pay for all of this with oil revenues" wouldn't pan out!

Posted by Mike | January 21, 2008 3:02 PM

Remember, these financial geniuses were also telling us they should give our social security money to the financial geniuses who were investing their company's money into subprime loan instruments. Surely, they knew how to invest it better than the stodgy old SSA.

Posted by Joshua | January 21, 2008 4:59 PM

That's because she's not planning on suspending all of those tax cuts, thehova. The Bush tax cuts were a 1.something trillion dollar deal, if I recall correctly.

Posted by Justin | January 22, 2008 1:46 AM

gerontion:

Perpetual motion machine sarcastic comments are cute and all. You are aware that tax revenues have increased since the implementation of the hated Bush tax cuts. The supply side arguments are not as simple as some of the proponents seem to suggest. But it is pretty obivious that you haven't taken the time to look seriously at the relationship between tax rates and revenue.

Posted by pepster | January 22, 2008 12:30 PM

Oh, way to go pepster! You go and introduce facts into the discussion and completely kill the vibe!!!

Posted by Tom | January 23, 2008 2:47 PM