The political dialogue surrounding the issue is generally around two opposing views, to wit; more deficit spending will ease short-term pain, enabling the economy to recover, while the long view supports policies that would reduce spending and bring our fiscal house in order.
The nations debt (excluding unfunded Medicare and Social Security liabilities) recently exceeded $15 trillion dollars.
Adding the unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security and the debt obligation comes close to $45 trillion! A staggering sum that unless dealt with places the United States in a similar category to Greece.
While we wale away at the seeming inability of Euro Zone nations to deal with their debt problem, America steadfastly refuses to deal with the shameless debt we have been piling on over the years.
Eventually the penalty for our neglect will be economic hardships that are unimaginable.
The worst of these is that foreign nations and individuals will no longer risk investing in our debt in the form of treasuries.
Yes, right now because of Europe's problems our treasuries are in high demand and because of that high demand we pay very low-interest rates.
But this will end and when it does and the rates go higher and we scrounge to find buyers of our debt time will have run out for the party that we thought would go on forever.
It might be news to some but a huge portion of our borrowing is applied to funding social security and Medicare.
How do you think things will be when we can't cover those expenditures and the rolls of these recipients are drastically cut? With the above in mind, much is written about a "deadlocked" congress on the debt issue.
Is this something new to American politics? A deadlocked congress, it is argued, obstructs the legislative process and is therefore a bad thing but a reading of American history from 1775 to the present is instructive.
For starters, regional representation in congress and the dynamic of political parties, with us since George Washington's administration, assure disagreements, sometimes violent ones.
Secondly, the very idea of a "republic" which is the category of government we have, establishes the states as a counterbalance to the some of the risks inherent in a strong central government.
Understanding this, things are playing out just as intended by our nation's founders.
When congress is deadlocked it is because we "the people" elected representatives with disparate views, sometimes enormously so.
In my view, what the founders intended was to institutionalize deadlock to reduce the risks of bad legislation.
How can anyone argue that the U.
isn't living beyond its means? To me the fight is on and "deadlock" is just what was needed.
Want to break the deadlock? Look to the 2012 elections!