Editorials
Our View: A warning not to be ignored
It is perhaps an example of the times in which we live. A report by The Government Accountability Office offers a bleak future for the American economy, and hardly anyone notices.
We are too busy discussing the balloon boy, the White House’s war on Fox News and (to be fair) crucial issues involving Afghanistan and health care. But it would have been nice if, just for a day or two, lawmakers might stop for a moment to discuss the elephant in the room sure to be with us longer than it takes for their terms expire.
A GAO report to Congress on the nation’s long-term fiscal outlook opens with an indictment of a U.S. government that has, it says, “contributed to near-term increases in federal deficits, which reached a record level in fiscal year 2009.” The government, according to the report, “faces even larger fiscal challenges that will persist long after the return of financial stability and economic growth.” The government is on an “unsustainable” fiscal path.
Translated, you and I are on an unsustainable path. Governments only make policy. Policies someday must come due, and eventually we all must pay.
A country that cannot control its spending must take in ever-greater amounts of money to maintain balance while being sure to protect itself as a credit risk.
The GAO report is not reassuring on this point. Extrapolating debt numbers from 2000 to 2040 under the present rate, the report says revenue would need to be increased by 47 percent and noninterest spending trimmed by 33 percent over the next 75 years to hold debt to 2008 levels (40.8 percent of GDP) to maintain a livable balance.
Nobody wants to worry about the future now, of course, while we are so busy digging out of our present troubles. Least of all members of Congress, who think long-term only as far as the next election cycle.
But tomorrow doesn’t worry for itself. A nation ignores the future at its peril.
Someday, this country will need to produce leaders willing to favor long-term planning over short-term gains. How many years will lapse before we begin discussing our long-term future in earnest? Ten years? Twenty? Thirty?
- Editorials
-
-
Our View: Health care debate is not over
Why it matters
A vast majority of Americans believe health care must be reformed. -
Our View: A good state for women's athletics
There's a lot of prominent college women's sports events going on in Minnesota, not least of which is the Division III "frozen four."
-
Our View: Drinking enforcement must be fair
A plan to curb drunk driving that would lead investigators back to bars has merit if it can be proactive instead of reactive and use carrots instead of sticks.
-
Our View: Cut's costs exceed savings
Why It Matters
Taxpayers will pay more to treat the mentally ill as crisis center closes. -
Our View: Everyone is important in census count
Minnesota’s representation, funding and national voice, is on the line with the 2010 U.S. census.
-
Our View: Library plan touches on dilemma
For many, it was a jaw-dropping proposal. The city of Mankato has a tentative plan to reduce its funding to the Blue Earth County library and the Summit Center by 50 percent.
-
Our View: Students must be the top priority
Why it matters
Allegations of sexual misconduct by school employees bring focus to the need to
protect students. -
Our View: School athletics model may need work
Why it matters
School sports will come under increasing scrutiny with tight budgets. -
Our View: Students' efforts aid community
The students behind Brand New Image are great role models.
-
Our View: Legislature, governor win one for the people
The Minnesota Legislature and Gov. Tim Pawlenty deserve credit for coming to agreement on a bonding bill in a truly unprecedented timeline.
- More Editorials Headlines
-
