One way or the other
Readers of this blog know that I've been a big fan of gridlock. It's kept my taxes from rising for quite a while now. But I'm starting to think that it's not a good long term strategy.
I'm starting to think the country needs to go one way or the other. All out or all in.
We either need to embrace big government and try to make it work, or get to a more minimal state.
America is now the Laodicea of modern democracies, and it's not working. I believe we'd get better overall economic performance if either party could put through their agenda and keep it in place.
Many on the left play down the importance of policy uncertainty, but I think it's real and important. The last 3 years have shown that. I also think both parties contribute to this uncertainty. It can't just be pinned on Obama.
The big government path is pretty clear. A bit more re-distribution, a LOT more regulation, maintaining and expanding at the margin existing social programs. More and more areas of life become areas where people have a right to consume in excess of what their private incomes can afford.
The small government path is not so obvious. Axing Homeland Security, Amtrak, and the Post Office is not going to shrink Federal spending very much. The amount of cutting to entitlements needed to get spending to say 15% is a tough sell when you consider our demographics and the values of the median voter. There has to be a strong case made for why after the transition, America will be a better place with a smaller Federal Government.
Just invoking the mantra of "entrepreneurship" isn't going to get the job done.