tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-875001767678246171.post4557565519779079631..comments2024-01-07T22:02:50.324-08:00Comments on Double Journey: California's Budget ProblemUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-875001767678246171.post-61196717362358120012009-05-21T17:04:51.000-07:002009-05-21T17:04:51.000-07:00Government spending should be steady over the long...Government spending should be steady over the long haul. Over some arbitrarily long period (say 10-15 years) spending and tax collection should net out to zero. Reducing government spending during a bust cycle just adds to the problems. Increasing during booms is just as bad. Both reflect poor short term thinking.<br><br>Sadly, we elect officials for much less time than the economic cycles of our economy. Therefore, when times are good, we at best "balance the budget". During a bust, we're stuck with either massive debt or reducing spending and prolonging the economic recession.<br><br>Although far, far, far from perfect, the Canadian federal government over the last 15 years has done a decent job of paying down the debt during the boom years. People may point to the high tax rates in Canada as a problem, but those issues shouldn't be confused with the basic math of matching government spending and collection over the long run.Sachinnoreply@blogger.com