Welcome to Atlanta, Mr. President. Now about pre-k . . .
President Barack Obama is expected in Atlanta today, to pitch a problem to a solution.
No, I don’t have that backward.
The president’s planned visit today to a Decatur pre-k school comes on the heels of his lauding Georgia’s preschool program during his State of the Union address Tuesday night. He wants to use it as a model for a federal effort “to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America.”
While I join Obama in applauding educational innovation in the states, I can think only of reasons a federal preschool program is a bad idea. Not least is the fact that the existing federal preschool program, Head Start, has been declared a failure by the very agency that administers it.
Head Start, a program for low-income children, has been around since 1965. But three years ago, after four and a half decades and $166 billion spent on the program, the Department of Health and Human Services concluded first-graders who had been in Head Start held virtually no advantage over their peers who hadn’t.
It’s an expensive failure, costing more than $7.5 billion per year to serve fewer than 1 million kids. At $7,838, Head Start’s cost per student in 2011 nearly doubled the $4,302 Georgia spent on each pre-k student that year.
But if Georgia is getting better results at roughly half the price, shouldn’t we want to see its model copied in other states?
Maybe so. Or maybe other states have different needs. Either way, they won’t match our success — and we won’t maintain it — if the feds take over pre-k.
As U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss put it to me last month: “There are too many people in Washington who are entrenched in the idea that if the federal government’s going to be involved in a program, we need to control it. And the way you control it is with money.”
Chambliss was talking about obstacles to devolving federal programs such as k-12 education and Medicaid to the states. But this fact of life in Washington is also a certain preview of how pre-k will turn out if it’s federalized.
There will be money, but also strings: regulations, stipulations, expectations. Even in Georgia the program won’t look like it does now, because the feds will craft policies for Savannah and Seattle, and everywhere in between. Successive agency heads for the program will want to put their stamps on it, if only to justify their jobs and budgets.
And, as clearly as Georgia’s elected leaders should see this coming, they’ll be hard-pressed to avoid it. The money will be too hard to pass up.
Georgia spends about one-third of its lottery proceeds on pre-k, about $312.4 million in next year’s projected revenues. The rest goes to the HOPE scholarship. How tempting will it be for a Georgia governor one day, if the value of HOPE continues to shrink relative to the cost of tuition, to take the federal pre-k dollars and devote all lottery revenues to college students?
But it will be fool’s gold, and not only because there’s no such thing as “free money” from the feds since taxpayers foot the bill sooner or later.
There’s also this: Those folks who rate government programs chiefly by how much money we spend on them will declare this a good deal — at first. Eventually, though, they’ll bemoan the falling quality of pre-k in Georgia and beseech Atlanta or Washington to cough up more money so that it can regain the effectiveness it once had … back when it was a cheaper, state-run program.
Washington this year is projected to borrow $7 billion (almost the annual cost of Head Start) every three days. Yet, Democrats and some Republicans are wringing their hands about the so-called sequester budget cuts that would trim that figure by barely one-tenth. So, you’d think this is exactly the wrong time for the feds to take on yet another role the states have proven themselves capable of handling.
That Obama is holding up Georgia’s pre-k program as a reason for Washington to get more involved in pre-k, rather than as evidence the states can handle more roles the feds can’t afford, shows just how backward he has it.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
418 comments Add your comment
Bruno
February 14th, 2013
11:19 pm
Well, enough with the sappy songs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-S6md3LNgs
CC
February 14th, 2013
11:31 pm
After the last few days, this seems appropriate . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dM3ZSGDCF_0
Bruno
February 14th, 2013
11:33 pm
Well, I’ll let the secret out here for the first time cj. Gather everyone around, it is so simple, if you can follow instructions.
1. Go to school every day, do your homework, respect your teacher, read often, and graduate on time.
For the few that make it that far.
2. Do not get married before your education is complete, you have a job, and can provide for a family.
3. Save and invest the money you earn. Pay yourself first. Deny yourself things that depreciate quickly.
Rafe–I’m not sure why these Libs seem to think that the path to success is so hard. Obviously, not everyone is going to earn a 6 figure salary, but it’s very possible to live a good life in the US with a little effort and discipline. I understand climbing out of poverty first hand, from my own experiences growing up in a poor family, and from watching others in similar circumstances who didn’t do what was necessary to better themselves. Hint: Even though I’ve earned a few million dollars over the course of my lifetime, I still have a 27″ CRT television and a prepaid cell phone that costs me around $3 per month. Pardon me if I don’t have more sympathy for the “poor” folks with big-screen plasma TVs and $100 per month cell phones.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 14th, 2013
11:48 pm
Poor JDW…we reminded him of all the Democrat scumbag hypocrites and made his talking points go bye bye.
Bruno
February 15th, 2013
12:22 am
There you are
Makin’ it up but you’re sure that it is a star
When all you’ll see
It’s an illusion shining down in front of me
There you’ll say
Even in time we shall control the day
When all you’ll see
Deep inside the day’s controlling you and me
And one peculiar point I see
As one of many ones of me
As truth is gathered, I rearrange
Inside out, outside in
Inside out, outside in
Perpetual change
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI0zkakitMQ
Bruno
February 15th, 2013
1:07 am
Guess I better hit the sack.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziS3mTKUs_Q
Politico
February 15th, 2013
7:13 am
Barry
You are not administering too many beat downs from a high chair and step stool, but do carry on with the. blah, blah, blahs if that in someway boosts your self esteem and ego
bookman parrot
February 15th, 2013
7:43 am
i think BHO needs to stop the grandstanding and the community organization and start staying in D.C. and work toward getting real jobs … i.e. not government jobs.
Georgia
February 15th, 2013
7:44 am
How did that Russian asteroid miss that cruise ship/train wreck? Did they have a casino on that ship?
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 15th, 2013
7:50 am
jdw -
When the Wall Street Crash of 1929 struck less than eight months after he took office, Hoover tried to combat the ensuing Great Depression with government enforced efforts, public works projects such as the Hoover Dam, tariffs such as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, an increase in the top tax bracket from 25% to 63% and increases in corporate taxes.[
Sound familiar?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
7:57 am
I guess drugs and imaginary deities go together quite well:
Anti-depressants weren’t the only medication being doled out in the most religious states. In fact, a state’s level of religiosity correlates with a state’s overall medication rate. Of the top ten most religious states in the Union, six are also on the list of top-ten most medicated states.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/160415/mississippi-maintains-hold-religious-state.aspx?utm_source=google&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=syndication
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
8:02 am
Aesop, please post your link for that Hoover information.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
8:11 am
Prior to the start of the Great Depression, Hoover’s first Treasury Secretary, Andrew Mellon, had proposed and seen enacted, numerous tax cuts, which cut the top income tax rate from 73% to 24% (under Presidents Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge). When combined with the sharp decline in incomes during the early depression, the result was a serious deficit in the federal budget. Congress, desperate to increase federal revenue, enacted the Revenue Act of 1932, which was the largest peacetime tax increase in history.[120] The Act increased taxes across the board, so that top earners were taxed at 63% on their net income. The 1932 Act also increased the tax on the net income of corporations from 12% to 13.75%.
wikipedia
Sound familiar? Sounds like 2001-2003, don’t it?
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
8:12 am
And remember, GDP was back to pre-1929 levels by 1937.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 15th, 2013
8:22 am
Sounds like 2001-2003, don’t it?
—————–
No, not at all. Our President Bush enacted modest tax cuts for all tax payers, and revenue, growth, and unemployment all improved. And then Democrats stopped paying their mortgages, en masse. Our President Bush enacted TARP, bequeathed a recovery to his successor, and tax revenues returned to pre-recession levels in three years. Unfortunately, during those same three years, Obozo increased spending and deficits to levels not seen since WWII.
indigo
February 15th, 2013
8:32 am
Rafe – 8:44 pm
Looks like taking care of number one is your only concern.
Right, boy?
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 15th, 2013
8:36 am
Taking care of number one should be everyone’s top priority. Once you’ve got that mastered, you can start thinking about taking care of others.
The mass of Obozo supporters who take from the makers and contribute nothing to the funding of their country can’t even handle the first part of that.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
8:41 am
Everyone pays taxes, Lil Barry. Even your momma on her house where you live scot free in the basement.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
8:49 am
Cons don’t need facts:
Georgia congressman Paul Broun claimed after Tuesday’s State of the Union address that “There are more people killed with baseball bats and hammers than are killed with guns.” Explainer readers may remember Broun as the congressman who believes the Earth is 9,000 years old. What about his hammer and baseball bat claim?
He’s wrong again, but he’s getting warmer. According to FBI data, 8,583 people were murdered with firearms in 2011. Only 496 people were killed by blunt objects, a category that includes not just hammers and baseball bats but crowbars, rocks, paving stones, statuettes, and electric guitars. Broun was off by a factor of at least 17 this time, a significant improvement on his estimate of the age of the Earth. The blue planet is 4.54 billion years old, or more than 500,000 times older than Broun believes it to be.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2013/02/paul_broun_says_hammers_and_baseball_bats_kill_more_people_than_guns_is.html
indigo
February 15th, 2013
9:02 am
Finn – 8:49
And yet, you’d be surprised, and dismayed, at the number of cons who see him as the next political messiah.
JohnnyReb
February 15th, 2013
9:07 am
I’m late to this party. That nasty old work gets in the way, sorta like The Constitution to Progressives and especially little Barry.
Good piece, Kyle. Can you move your desk closer to Bookman so that a little common sense will rub off?
I posted on Bookman’s blog that pre-K has proven to be of no advantage, but was belittled and provided links to pieces by Liberals applauding it. Talk about denial.
When the Feds of all people find no advantage by the third grade, it’s time not to make it bigger, modigy it, or try to do better. It’s time to can it. That’s right. Stop it.
Pre-K is baby sitting paid for by taxpayers. Enough.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:08 am
O’ yes I do…in a big way. Take off those redneck colored glasses and smell the coffee. The federal budget is made up of three parts Entitlement Spending which functions on autopilot and is not part of the appropriations process (psssst that means unless Congress acts it happens all by itself), interest which is also an autopilot expenditure and everything else which is called Discretionary spending. That includes military and all the other programs you are so fond of railing against. This is the part that the President and Congress control on an annual basis.
So lets look at the two of them shall we. The source here is your favorite Wingnut Organization, except of course when it comes to individual mandates, The Heritage Foundation.
In 2011 dollars you can see that The first President Bush’s (o would that the apple had stayed close to the tree) budget in FY 1992 had $803 billion in Discretionary spending and President Clinton’s last in FY 2001 had $825 billion. That’s an overall growth rate of about 3.75% and an annual growth rate of LESS THAN 1%.
Now lets look at “Mr. I Am The Worst President in History” that duty shirking bundle of good cheer from Texas Duhbya. His last budget in FY 2009 contained a WHOPPING $1.3 TRILLION in 2001 dollars of Discretionary Spending. That is a staggering growth rate of almost 58% and an annual growth rate of 7.1%. Now yeah yeah yeah you cons like to claim, in the fact of facts that Obama ran that number up. So lets use 2008 (pssst…that’s before Obama was elected even you cant whine about that). In 2008 old Duhbya spent $1.205 trillion so much as you would like the news is no better. That only cuts his annual growth rate to 6.6% per annum.
Now for the real world. In the real world President Obama had discretionary spending of 1.289 billion. That is actually a REDUCTION of $11 billion from 2009 and if you want to measure from 2008 that is an annual growth rate of LESS THAN 1% in the worst Recession in History, brought to you courtesy of that aforementioned duty shirking bundle of good cheer from Texas. So in spite of all the programs you like to whine about Obama had increased spending at a rate of about 1/6 that of Duhbya.
So by all means lets have that conversation shall we?
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2012
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:09 am
Opps forgot the reference in the prior post…
@CC…”You don’t want a comparison of spending between Bush and Hussein!”
Madmax
February 15th, 2013
9:13 am
Where does Ga rank in high school education? If this is such a success wouldn’t we rank higher in the following grades? Isn’t that the point of this or is it really just a good day care system. As for the Feds taking it over, really, we want another level of bureaucracy on top of the state? Assuming this is a good program, (which as noted above, the high school results don’t prove out yet) there is nothing to stop other states from modeling it without creating another federal program. This is no different than fire, police, etc. It is a local and state issue. If you force this program on all states, you are driving out the very forces that created this program. Need breeds innovation and standardization breeds stagnation.
Aquagirl
February 15th, 2013
9:13 am
I posted on Bookman’s blog that pre-K has proven to be of no advantage, but was belittled
You were belittled for an ignorant statement, that’s what happens in life.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:18 am
@Bruno…”I’m feeling a little generous tonight, so I’ll extend an olive branch to you. We haven’t gotten into it too badly here, but I’ve gone out of my way to be abrasive to you due to your Lib tendencies. I think you sincerely have well wishes for the country, however, so will cut you some slack in the future.”
Well thanks Bruno, I shall try to respond in kind.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 15th, 2013
9:19 am
Finn – Coolidge and Hoover were two entirely different presidents. Coolidge left office with the economy roaring at such a pace, as a result of his tax cuts, that he was worried government would take the excess revenue and grow itself.
Enter Hoover -
Hoover expanded civil service coverage of Federal positions, canceled private oil leases on government lands, and by instructing the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service to pursue gangsters for tax evasion, he enabled the prosecution of mobster Al Capone. He appointed a commission that set aside 3,000,000 acres (12,000 km²) of national parks and 2,300,000 acres of national forests; advocated tax reduction for low-income Americans (not enacted); closed certain tax loopholes for the wealthy; doubled the number of veterans’ hospital facilities; negotiated a treaty on St. Lawrence Seaway (which failed in the U.S. Senate); wrote a Children’s Charter that advocated protection of every child regardless of race or gender; created an antitrust division in the Justice Department; required air mail carriers to adopt stricter safety measures and improve service; proposed federal loans for urban slum clearances (not enacted); organized the Federal Bureau of Prisons; reorganized the Bureau of Indian Affairs; instituted prison reform; proposed a federal Department of Education (not enacted); advocated $50-per-month pensions for Americans over 65 (not enacted); chaired White House conferences on child health, protection, homebuilding and home-ownership; began construction of the Boulder Dam (later renamed Hoover Dam); and signed the Norris – La Guardia Act that limited judicial intervention in labor disputes.[
Big government, no?
The Wall Street Crash of 1929, also known as the Black Tuesday[1] and the Stock Market Crash of 1929, began in late October 1929 and was the most devastating stock market crash in the history of the United States. Economist and author Jude Wanniski later correlated these swings with the prospects for passage of the Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act, which was then being debated in Congress
And then he over reacted and raised taxes, among other mindless progressive principles.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:28 am
@Aesop…”When the Wall Street Crash of 1929 struck less than eight months after he took office, Hoover tried to combat the ensuing Great Depression with government enforced efforts, public works projects such as the Hoover Dam, tariffs such as the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, an increase in the top tax bracket from 25% to 63% and increases in corporate taxes.[”
You aren’t real smart are you? First off the Smoot-Hawley act was a REPUBLICAN act…they were both Republicans. Yep it was a real downer and thankfully we did not try that this time around.
By the time Hoover got round to public works in 1932 his goose was cooked….if he had moved earlier it might have had more impact. Instead he spent three years attempting to get private charities to pick up the slack…sound familar?
Since I am pretty sure you won’t be reading the history books try the Cliff Notes.
http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/The-Beginnings-of-the-Great-Depression.topicArticleId-25238,articleId-25205.html
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:34 am
@Aseop…”And then he over reacted and raised taxes, among other mindless progressive principles.”
Taxes were not rasied until 1932….again well after the train left the station.
“With a $2 billion deficit during annual year 1931, Hoover felt that he had to do something in the next year to combat it. Deficit spending is indeed an evil, but a balanced budget is not necessarily a good, particularly when the “balance” is obtained by increasing revenue and expenditures. If he wanted to balance the budget, Hoover had two choices open to him: to reduce expenditures, and thereby relieve the economy of some of the aggravated burden of government, or to increase that burden further by raising taxes. He chose the latter course. ”
The whole point being that you don’t try to balance the budget DURING the crisis by either means…who is it that can’t seem to understand that.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 15th, 2013
9:37 am
Funny, that Bush’s recession was so short, and the Obama recovery is sooooooooooooooo long. It seems to me we were better off in the recession, than in the recovery. Guess when you pattern your recovery after the one that lasted the longest (Roosevelt), you reap the same results. I will wonder always, how much shorter it may have been had Barry patterned it after those recoveries that worked quickly. But, ulterior motives, I believe, were involved in his choices.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 15th, 2013
9:38 am
indigo, if everyone concentrated on taking care of themselves, we would not be a nation of entitlements.
We have too many people that have decided it is easier to vote for government to give them some of what those who work hard make, so they don’t have to work at all.
md
February 15th, 2013
9:41 am
“So by all means lets have that conversation shall we?”
Yes, let’s do. I find it quite interesting that you want to compare Bush’s numbers (which admittedly are not that wonderful and many here have said that many times) to 7 years earlier, yet then you compare Obama’s numbers to Bush.
If we are going to have the conversation, we need to compare apples to apples…..to do that you also have to compare the Obama numbers to 2001 as you did with Bush.
What that will tell you as we are spending way more than we have year over year…..those pesky fundamentals.
If both spouses run up the credit card, it matters not which one spent more when the bill comes due……what matters is getting the bill paid and stopping the behavior that created such a big bill.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 15th, 2013
9:47 am
Yep, Bush cut taxes, recession ends. obozo and hoover raise taxes, recession drags on for eva. Some of us can be quite mindless when put our empty heads to it, right, jdw?
sailfish
February 15th, 2013
9:56 am
aesop@9:47
If you actually believe that, then it’s quite apparent people like you are the problem!
Republicans, keep them in the minority where they belong, governing is not for the stupid.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
9:59 am
@Md…”If we are going to have the conversation, we need to compare apples to apples…..to do that you also have to compare the Obama numbers to 2001 as you did with Bush.”
No you don’t. The point is that NO ONE Republican or Democrat is going to cut the budget in a meaningful way. You can’t, it is simply too big of a jolt for the economy at large and the time a segment of our government spends pushing an untenable idea is wasted time.
The way you bring in in balance is to grow revenue faster than spending and it takes time, lots more considering how badly Duhbya screwed it up. He changed the dynamic and swung the pendulum, as did Reagan before him, to a state where spending grew really fast and revenue shrunk (tax cuts) and several years later resumed it’s normal path. That creates deficits.
Obama has been able to recreate a situation where revenue is starting to grow faster than spending and that will solve the problem over a long term. Numbers in billions…
2012 deficit -1,326.9
2013 deficit estimate -901.4
2014 deficit estimate -667.8
2015 deficit estimate -609.7
2016 deficit estimate -648.8
2017 deficit estimate -612.4
Personally I would like to see more acceleration by growing revenue a bit faster, tweaking some of the entitlement programs and some targeted spending freezes but given the current dysfunction of the Republicans I don’t see that happening any time soon.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
9:59 am
It seems to me we were better off in the recession, than in the recovery.
I guess you don’t own a house, own stocks, or have a 401k/pension? Figures. You gotta get out of your mammas basement, son. Get a job.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
10:01 am
@Aseop…”Some of us can be quite mindless when put our empty heads”
Indeed you are.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
10:02 am
@Rafe…”Funny, that Bush’s recession was so short”
Guess you missed that whole financial system meltdown thingy…it complicates matters.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 15th, 2013
10:06 am
Here is all you need to know -
You aren’t real smart are you? First off the Smoot-Hawley act was a REPUBLICAN act…they were both Republicans.
Ever notice how liberals are like totally amazed that someone could criticize the wrong headed policies of their own party? That were not all lock step mindless zombies like they are? How much critical thought process do you think they expend, babbling on behalf of rachel maddow?
md
February 15th, 2013
10:06 am
“The point is that NO ONE Republican or Democrat is going to cut the budget in a meaningful way. You can’t, it is simply too big of a jolt for the economy at large and the time a segment of our government spends pushing an untenable idea is wasted time. ”
The problem with that scenario is the hoping and wishing aspect. Growth is never guaranteed, and the more we spend the more we take out of the private sector that needs to do the growing.
And we just had a negative quarter, so that growth seems to be a mirage……
Sometimes, tough medicine is required, such as working to spend what we have vs spending what we don’t have with our fingers crossed that the growth will occur……
md
February 15th, 2013
10:08 am
2012 deficit -1,326.9
“2013 deficit estimate -901.4
2014 deficit estimate -667.8
2015 deficit estimate -609.7
2016 deficit estimate -648.8
2017 deficit estimate -612.4″
Do I need to put up the Obamacare “estimates” for reference, or do we both know those numbers mean very little…..
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
February 15th, 2013
10:09 am
Sometimes, tough medicine is required
unless you are in the business of getting re-elected every 4 years. you can’t push a round peg through a square hole. Get outta yer mamas basement, too!
CC
February 15th, 2013
10:26 am
JDW:
It must be exhausting to research and pick various pieces of information to fit your arguments. Why make the simple complex unless your point is to make false claims? Look at the overall spending figures between the Bush and the Obama administration, including the huge payback slush fund laughingly referred to as ’stimulus’. How much is the federal government spending each year through the term of Bush compared to the term of Obama? How much is BORROWED under the Obama administration compared to the Bush administration?
Your game playing does not impress . . .
Dusty
February 15th, 2013
10:31 am
Well, not much point in posting this morning. Seems the name calling is complete. The president went back to Washington to plan another trip. All’s right with the world!
It certainly was yesterday. I’ve got enough chocolate candy to gain twenty pounds and flowers enough for a small funeral. They are so pretty, flowers that is.. I just love Valentine’s Day. All politicians should celebrate that lovely day and send valentines saying “I just lowered your taxes! (signed) Your Washington sweetie!”
I tell you, I’d feel a lot better about that place of guv’ment!
indigo
February 15th, 2013
10:38 am
Rafe – 9:37
FDR was not contending with a Recession. He was trying to overcome The Great Depression. A Recession is missing a day of work with a cold. A depression is two weeks in the hospital with the flu.
FDR, and the Republicans as well, tried every way possible to recover from the Depression. Nothing really worked. It took WWII to finally get us out of it.
md
February 15th, 2013
10:52 am
“Get outta yer mamas basement, too!”
Seriously? Come on man….
Dusty
February 15th, 2013
10:52 am
Rafe,
You are safe
With your wise comments.
While many of us
Do nothing but fuss,
You keep right on making sense.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
10:58 am
@Aseop…”Ever notice how liberals are like totally amazed that someone could criticize the wrong headed policies of their own party?”
No that’s not what amazed me…what amazed me is that you tried to link a past Republican response to the Democrats of today that specifically repudiated said response. There was never a move to foster protectionism among today’s Democratic leaders.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
11:01 am
@md…”Growth is never guaranteed, and the more we spend the more we take out of the private sector that needs to do the growing. And we just had a negative quarter, so that growth seems to be a mirage……”
O Dear…well by all means lets cut spending by .01% in the next quarter….year on year growth is not as you say “guaranteed” however based on past experinance one can say with complete certainty that over the long term it will in fact happen. In fact out of lets say the last 75 years or so it has in fact happened what…90% of the time. Making the claim that our economy is going to stop growing over the longterm is simply not realistic.
JDW
February 15th, 2013
11:02 am
@md…”Do I need to put up the Obamacare “estimates” for reference, or do we both know those numbers mean very little…..”
Except for the tiny little fact they are included.