Antikarma

OK, now that's just ignorant stereotypical thinking, me's thinking. My wife works for the feds, she's a helluva lot higher on the food chain then a secretary, and she earns the SECOND number you quoted. Hell her boss earns less than 70k, by far.

And whereas there are some extremely good dissections of the wheres and the how's, I prefer to take a somewhat naive and idealistic approach to the reasoning of why the debt is so high, as opposed to where it could be.

Lack of creativity. It seems every new approach we have, is simply the status quo with new spin. That can be applied to fixing healthcare, or our military, or pretty much any federal fix it up program you like. Cue 1 year study and report here, cue fist full of dollars next, cue trumpeting of our revived and saved [insert program here].

I think, as financial managers go, the liberals have done a bang up job. I think as free thinkers and problem solvers, they leave much to the imagination.

And my theory on the surplus? I know this will get shot down as incorrect or perhaps a horrible idea and I'd like to hear a counter argument. Universal, free day care. My family pays 800 a month for our two kids. And many single parents can not work because their income cannot support both day care and their expenses. All of that income gets turned right back around into the economy. I know it would easily double the disposable income of my family (course, my disposable income goes to Vegas, but don't tell the feds

), and by following the same (of course, perhaps flawed) theory, many income support dependant families can go get jobs, which would lower the federal burden as well as create new tax revenue.

Or hell, legalize pot. Could support Universal Daycare off the hippies in the Okanagan

__________________

"Whoever you are, go out into the evening,
leaving your room, of which you know each bit;
your house is the last before the infinite,
whoever you are."