The State of Republicans Unbalanced Balancing of the Union

Much publicity has been created by the Republicans of the new Congress about their new mandate.

You will hear bantering around the congressional halls about how “The People have spoken” or “This time we’re going to get it right”….especially on this subject of balancing the budget.

According to them, it seems the very root of the countries economic woes rotate around this core of getting “our house in order”.

“We must balance the budget”… “We cannot spend what we don’t have”….”How can we govern if we cannot balance the checkbook”, etc

Without getting into the simplicity of revolving all economic problems around the balanced budget, my contention is why don’t they apply the same thought process to anything else?

Why is it so important to have a balance of input and output on the economy, but not have balance applied to anything else?

I say apply this “Balanced Modus Operandi” or BMO as I would call it, to everything including all business. Doesn’t business effect the economy as much as everything else?

The term of balanced budget can apply to a lot of things, not just money.

So let’s give it a go. The new rules of BMO are as follows…

If a company creates a export of 500 jobs by building a manufacturing plant in China, they must also build a manufacturing plant here in the United States that also creates 500 jobs. Balance is as Balance does?

If a natural resource is taken from the land or by underground mining, then it must be replaced with the same or equivalent.

For example, cut lumber from forests must be replaced with planted trees. Something that some of the lumber companies have already discovered the value in.

Oil, since it can’t be replaced, violates the BMO rules because it’s not possible to balanced so it must be compensated with funds to develop something that can be balanced such as renewable energy sources. Certainly not a bad thing.

Any company that introduces pollution into the atmosphere must also remove the same equivalent of pollution from the air.

I could give example after example of current items that are “unbalanced”. In business, politics, social issues, etc.

But for some reason the Republicans think that balance should only be applied to one item, the budget.



Now a Republican that’s thinking ahead in the future..(is there one?)… may say, “Well in theory that may be ideal, but you must be a realist and think of the present situation. In the short term, that would cause more damage than good, especially for the economy.”

To which I would say exactly!

Now why is it different for my hypothetical BMO balancing and not for balancing the budget?

Why not address some of the issues that got the economy in this condition in the first place?

Perhaps allowing the export of our manufacturing base while thinking that clever manipulation of numbers by investment bankers is not enough to keep a countries economy going?

Do something about those issues so that it would benefit all of the country, especially the unemployed.

Think beyond just those top 1 percent super-rich and “corporate-citizens”.

Now isn’t that an idea that seems fair and balanced?