Paulson on Principles: The Frugal American
by Terry Paulson
"What is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? A wise and frugal government."
Frugality and thrift used to be core values in America—for citizens and the government they created. Benjamin Franklin would
warn: “Beware of little expenses; a small leak will sink a great ship.”
Thomas Jefferson stressed fiscal restraint:
“What is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread. I own, I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy.”
But something has happened to this grounding value—neither our government nor many of our citizens seem to embrace fiscal restraint as a principle worth using.
A Newsweek article focused on the returning “Urge to Splurge:” “Chastened by the brutal lessons of the worst economic downturn in decades, Americans swore off conspicuous consumption and resolved to embrace the thrifty ways of their
grandparents who lived through the Great Depression. But as any dieter can tell you, resolutions are made to be broken.”
Even though 89 percent of Americans tell Gallup that they’re watching their expenditures very closely, spending is heading back up and saving is heading down. So much for the rebirth of the frugal American!
So, are Americans hard-wired to keep buying more stuff? Do they want government to spend less or more? Unfortunately, whether it is citizens or the government, spending is great fun, until the bill arrives.
The deficit is like the guy that finds a rattlesnake in his pants.
Cutting government spending has proved difficult for both parties. Ross Perot captured it best: “The deficit is like the guy that finds a rattlesnake in his pants. He knows he’s got to shoot it, but he doesn’t want to hit anything important.” In today’s political environment, you don’t get applauded for taking away entitlements or cutting budgets.
Ronald Reagan identified the problem and the opportunity: “I don’t think anyone objects to paying reasonable taxes and we all agree to the need to help the less fortunate. But, rich or poor, young or old, a person’s reward for working more should always clearly exceed his reward for working less…. Americans aren’t losing their confidence. They’re losing their shirts.”
Unfortunately, during his eight years, federal revenue doubled, but federal spending increased even more. Changing habits is difficult. Will Rogers loved to poke fun at politicians. He wrote: “I remember back when a liberal was someone who was generous with his own money.” Little did he know how bad it would get!
When America began, government cost the average citizen $20 in today’s money.
John Stossel, in Give Me a Break, shows Federal spending from 1789 to 2003. The line is all but flat until World War II. When
America began, government cost the average citizen $20 in today’s money. That’s $20 a year! Taxes rose during wars, but for most of the history of America spending never exceeded a few hundred dollars per citizen.
During World War II, government got much bigger. It was supposed to shrink again after the war. It never did; it just kept expanding. In 2010, federal spending ($6.3 trillion) cost every man, woman and child in this country just under $20,000 a year! If you are not paying that, you’re making your neighbor pay your share!
In Chapter 16 of The Prince, Machiavelli suggests: “A prince either spends his own substance and that of his subjects, or that of others. Of the first two he should be very sparing, but in spending that of others he ought not to omit any act of liberality.”
Progressive politicians act like princes every day. Government bureaucrats love to complain: “How are we going to pay for it?” But they have no concern at all how you the taxpayers are going to pay for it.
The choice that liberals make is always clear: Instead of suggesting government go on a diet, they are ready to raise taxes to support new and improved government answers to every American’s problem.
Too many programs seem to have an incentive to fail.
Few produce results. In fact, too many programs seem to have an incentive to fail. When they keep failing, they just get more money and time to fix the growing problems. When the Department of Energy was established to coordinate an effective energy plan, we went from importing 40% of our oil to now importing over 60% of our oil. If that defines success, they deserve the increased funding they keep getting.
A liberal defines compassion by how many people are “helped” by government; conservatives define compassion by how many people no longer need it. Democrats tend to say: “I’m here to help you; you can’t make it without me.” Conservatives say: “I did it; this is how I did it; I know you can do it, too.”
Theodore J. Forstmann, founding chairman of Empower America, put it well: “(Politicians) warn us about all the ‘pain’ involved in cutting government spending–in their spending less of our money? Painful for whom? Maybe it’s painful for politicians. But, for the average citizen, what pain is there involved in his keeping more of his money to invest it the way he wants? No government in the history of the world has ever borne the cost of anything. Taxes cost people. Tax cuts do not cost government.”
Former Senator Everett Dirksen added a bit humor: “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you are talking about real money.” Well, those billions are now hatching into a $15 trillion dollar deficit. As the bumper sticker says, “Don’t tell Obama what comes after trillion!”
Tell your elected politicians that you want zero-based budgeting
Conservatives are promising to bring frugality back to government. They will need our support. Those receiving more from government than they pay in will be screaming at the loss of their entitlements! To help conservatives stay the course, the taxpayers whose taxes are being redistributed must demonstrate their support even louder.
Tell your elected politicians that you want zero-based budgeting where there are no automatic budget increases or funding. Performance budgeting is all about paying for results where it counts. It’s time to invest taxpayer money where it matters and end funding for what isn’t worth doing. Good leaders encourage focus instead of throwing more money at unnecessary or poor performing bureaucracies.
We need government to develop a scrounger mentality where committed leaders and employees become resourceful and
creative in getting things done. A sign in the CA Finance Department reads: “Nothing inspires genius like a tight budget.” They should have put that sign up years ago.
Frugality and thrift used to be core values in America—for citizens and the government they created. Benjamin Franklin would
warn: “Beware of little expenses; a small leak will sink a great ship.”
Thomas Jefferson stressed fiscal restraint:
“What is necessary to make us a happy and prosperous people? A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. Were we directed from Washington when to sow, and when to reap, we should soon want bread. I own, I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people, under the pretense of taking care of them, they must become happy.”
But something has happened to this grounding value—neither our government nor many of our citizens seem to embrace fiscal restraint as a principle worth using.
A Newsweek article focused on the returning “Urge to Splurge:” “Chastened by the brutal lessons of the worst economic downturn in decades, Americans swore off conspicuous consumption and resolved to embrace the thrifty ways of their
grandparents who lived through the Great Depression. But as any dieter can tell you, resolutions are made to be broken.”
Even though 89 percent of Americans tell Gallup that they’re watching their expenditures very closely, spending is heading back up and saving is heading down. So much for the rebirth of the frugal American!
So, are Americans hard-wired to keep buying more stuff? Do they want government to spend less or more? Unfortunately, whether it is citizens or the government, spending is great fun, until the bill arrives.
The deficit is like the guy that finds a rattlesnake in his pants.
Cutting government spending has proved difficult for both parties. Ross Perot captured it best: “The deficit is like the guy that finds a rattlesnake in his pants. He knows he’s got to shoot it, but he doesn’t want to hit anything important.” In today’s political environment, you don’t get applauded for taking away entitlements or cutting budgets.
Ronald Reagan identified the problem and the opportunity: “I don’t think anyone objects to paying reasonable taxes and we all agree to the need to help the less fortunate. But, rich or poor, young or old, a person’s reward for working more should always clearly exceed his reward for working less…. Americans aren’t losing their confidence. They’re losing their shirts.”
Unfortunately, during his eight years, federal revenue doubled, but federal spending increased even more. Changing habits is difficult. Will Rogers loved to poke fun at politicians. He wrote: “I remember back when a liberal was someone who was generous with his own money.” Little did he know how bad it would get!
When America began, government cost the average citizen $20 in today’s money.
John Stossel, in Give Me a Break, shows Federal spending from 1789 to 2003. The line is all but flat until World War II. When
America began, government cost the average citizen $20 in today’s money. That’s $20 a year! Taxes rose during wars, but for most of the history of America spending never exceeded a few hundred dollars per citizen.
During World War II, government got much bigger. It was supposed to shrink again after the war. It never did; it just kept expanding. In 2010, federal spending ($6.3 trillion) cost every man, woman and child in this country just under $20,000 a year! If you are not paying that, you’re making your neighbor pay your share!
In Chapter 16 of The Prince, Machiavelli suggests: “A prince either spends his own substance and that of his subjects, or that of others. Of the first two he should be very sparing, but in spending that of others he ought not to omit any act of liberality.”
Progressive politicians act like princes every day. Government bureaucrats love to complain: “How are we going to pay for it?” But they have no concern at all how you the taxpayers are going to pay for it.
The choice that liberals make is always clear: Instead of suggesting government go on a diet, they are ready to raise taxes to support new and improved government answers to every American’s problem.
Too many programs seem to have an incentive to fail.
Few produce results. In fact, too many programs seem to have an incentive to fail. When they keep failing, they just get more money and time to fix the growing problems. When the Department of Energy was established to coordinate an effective energy plan, we went from importing 40% of our oil to now importing over 60% of our oil. If that defines success, they deserve the increased funding they keep getting.
A liberal defines compassion by how many people are “helped” by government; conservatives define compassion by how many people no longer need it. Democrats tend to say: “I’m here to help you; you can’t make it without me.” Conservatives say: “I did it; this is how I did it; I know you can do it, too.”
Theodore J. Forstmann, founding chairman of Empower America, put it well: “(Politicians) warn us about all the ‘pain’ involved in cutting government spending–in their spending less of our money? Painful for whom? Maybe it’s painful for politicians. But, for the average citizen, what pain is there involved in his keeping more of his money to invest it the way he wants? No government in the history of the world has ever borne the cost of anything. Taxes cost people. Tax cuts do not cost government.”
Former Senator Everett Dirksen added a bit humor: “A billion here, a billion there, and pretty soon you are talking about real money.” Well, those billions are now hatching into a $15 trillion dollar deficit. As the bumper sticker says, “Don’t tell Obama what comes after trillion!”
Tell your elected politicians that you want zero-based budgeting
Conservatives are promising to bring frugality back to government. They will need our support. Those receiving more from government than they pay in will be screaming at the loss of their entitlements! To help conservatives stay the course, the taxpayers whose taxes are being redistributed must demonstrate their support even louder.
Tell your elected politicians that you want zero-based budgeting where there are no automatic budget increases or funding. Performance budgeting is all about paying for results where it counts. It’s time to invest taxpayer money where it matters and end funding for what isn’t worth doing. Good leaders encourage focus instead of throwing more money at unnecessary or poor performing bureaucracies.
We need government to develop a scrounger mentality where committed leaders and employees become resourceful and
creative in getting things done. A sign in the CA Finance Department reads: “Nothing inspires genius like a tight budget.” They should have put that sign up years ago.
Terry Paulson, PhD is a psychologist, award-winning professional speaker on leadership and change,
lead columnist for Townhall and RightNetwork, author of
