TurboBuicks.com - View Single Post

Scott GN231 · 01-12-2004, 01:22 PM

Perhaps yes, perhaps no, but I don't think you can give an educated reply without knowing the cost and where the money is going to come from.

These things have a great way of driving technology, but at what cost?

<snip>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES STATEMENT
Friday, January 9, 2004
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

STATEMENT OF ROBERT GREENSTEIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES,
REGARDING THE WHITE HOUSE MOON/MARS INITIATIVE

The moon/Mars initiative will cost many hundreds of billions of dollars, possibly as much as $1 trillion. The President should indicate where the money will come from.

In the past three years, what were multi-trillion dollar budget surpluses projected for the coming decade have turned into multi-trillion dollar budget deficits. We have not experienced such severe budget deterioration in so short a time period since World War II caused the nation's defense budget to grow sharply. Agencies such as the International Monetary Fund now are warning of potentially grave long-term consequences if we do not change course and get our fiscal house in order. Given these looming deficits, there is no money available in current or future budgets for the expensive new space endeavor.

So the President needs to lay out where the money will come from. Will he agree to scale back some of the munificent and very costly tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Since the answer seems to be "no," what parts of the budget does he propose to cut — Medicare, education, environmental pollution, other areas, in order to finance the space initiative? Or does he propose not to finance it and simply to allow deficits to become even larger, with adverse consequences down the road for the economy and the standard-of-living of average families?

In 2001, we were told we could have it all — large tax cuts, a major defense build-up, a Medicare drug benefit, and more — without going into deficit at all. That proved wrong. It now is clear that we cannot simultaneously proceed with the tax cuts, a prescription drug benefit, a global war against terrorism, efforts to improve our education system, measures to make Social Security and Medicare solvent for the long term, and the new space initiative. Something (probably many things) has to give. We should not repeat the mistakes of the past and dig the deficit hole even deeper, which would load still larger financial burdens on younger generations.

For more information, access the Center's web site at <http://www.cbpp.org>.

01-12-2004, 01:22 PM	#9 (permalink)
Scott GN231 Dr. Nehi Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Philly area Posts: 861	Perhaps yes, perhaps no, but I don't think you can give an educated reply without knowing the cost and where the money is going to come from. These things have a great way of driving technology, but at what cost? <snip> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES STATEMENT Friday, January 9, 2004 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ STATEMENT OF ROBERT GREENSTEIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES, REGARDING THE WHITE HOUSE MOON/MARS INITIATIVE The moon/Mars initiative will cost many hundreds of billions of dollars, possibly as much as $1 trillion. The President should indicate where the money will come from. In the past three years, what were multi-trillion dollar budget surpluses projected for the coming decade have turned into multi-trillion dollar budget deficits. We have not experienced such severe budget deterioration in so short a time period since World War II caused the nation's defense budget to grow sharply. Agencies such as the International Monetary Fund now are warning of potentially grave long-term consequences if we do not change course and get our fiscal house in order. Given these looming deficits, there is no money available in current or future budgets for the expensive new space endeavor. So the President needs to lay out where the money will come from. Will he agree to scale back some of the munificent and very costly tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans? Since the answer seems to be "no," what parts of the budget does he propose to cut — Medicare, education, environmental pollution, other areas, in order to finance the space initiative? Or does he propose not to finance it and simply to allow deficits to become even larger, with adverse consequences down the road for the economy and the standard-of-living of average families? In 2001, we were told we could have it all — large tax cuts, a major defense build-up, a Medicare drug benefit, and more — without going into deficit at all. That proved wrong. It now is clear that we cannot simultaneously proceed with the tax cuts, a prescription drug benefit, a global war against terrorism, efforts to improve our education system, measures to make Social Security and Medicare solvent for the long term, and the new space initiative. Something (probably many things) has to give. We should not repeat the mistakes of the past and dig the deficit hole even deeper, which would load still larger financial burdens on younger generations. For more information, access the Center's web site at <http://www.cbpp.org>.