1 min read

Believe it or Not

Reading through the NY Times today, I got quite the shock when I read this:

Last week, Congress and the White House released their summer budget updates, touching off a flurry of headlines and commentary suggesting President Obama’s agenda would produce deficits exceeding a total of $9 trillion over a decade. Others said $2 trillion. Both calculations were misleading.

While Mr. Obama has proposed nothing to reduce the nation’s red ink, he also has not deepened it — yet.

via Who Gets the Blame for the Deep Deficit? — NYTimes.com.

This short article is much more like a post from a reputable blog. It is fair, balanced, short, and to the point. I have never seen a daily newspaper publish something so evenhanded and cautiously fair (at least not outside the opinion section).

That said, we should’t lose sight of the point: much of the projected budget deficit assumes keeping the status quo, and Congress and the Obama’s administrations plans will not make much difference either way.

It’s so frustrating living in an age of political inaction. I have the suspicion that a lot of voter apathy can be explained by the lack of action by politicians — It’s easy toget fired up about something you disagree, but hard to get motivated over nothing.