I agree with this…I think it’s a function of individual fiscal conservatives being outnumbered by state worshipers who believe in a free lunch…I know that’s a gross oversimplification but, alas there are only so many hours in a day…
also, limited spending in relation to what?? I’m assuming you mean at a,or below, a certain percentage of GDP?? Do you have a number in mind (seriously asking)?
Limited to what is necessary. Of course, that is where the problem starts. Do we need another nuclear submarine? If you live in CT the answer is yes. Montana? I’m not so sure.
I read something about this a little while ago, and I can’t remember the source, but the writer said that when a nation has a lot of debt yet manages to still function, it gives the impression of invulnerability and a sense of power as the nation is unaffected by something we would assume would cripple it.
He is going to build the most bigly and terrific wall so why not have the same when it comes to the deficit. At least he was born in the USA.
Looked at the wrong budget…
Uh hey you guys. I was only 8 at the time but I recall Gingrich and Clinton working together with that whole contract for America thing. They achieved a budget surplus and reduced the national debt no? More recent than Coolidge.
Granted we had an insane internet bubble at the time, but the surplus stands.
But why didn’t it last?
Because different people got elected, policy priorities changed. War with the ME for 17 years. 2 recessions.
Lest we forget: Illuminati, Lizard People and Jews.
And if those things are inevitable then would it mean a fiscally conservative state is an impossibility?
Not one of the things I listed was inevitable.
Different people getting elected and recessions are inevitable 
Least if you subscribe to election terms and economic cycles
So fiscal conservatism isn’t about balancing a budget. Well, okay then - which “ism” is?
Reagan struck the mortal blow years ago, and it has staggered around, bleeding out, since then. Trump and his merry band of “conservatives” (scare quotes intentional) finished it off.
There are a few dedicated believers still, but they’ve been all but drummed out of each party.
Frankly, I’m amazed at the numbers 45 billion for Afghanistan? That’s insane.
The Russian operation in Syria costs around 25 million/month, while the entire troll ecosystem and cyber warfare units cost additional 20 million, according to Russian independent analysts.
So for roughly 500 million per year you’ve got geopolitical parity with the US for around 1/100th cost of Afghanistan involvement . I guess this is the revenge for that Reagan spending trap the USSR fell into…
Yes. But if the electorate wanted we could have elected more Newts and Bills. While both flawed they were both happy to compromise and get SOME of what they want for the good of their constituents (and their careers/legacies).
I refuse to believe dross like Maxines and Donalds are inevitable.
While there’s always a business cycle the length and severity of recessions is always related to government policy.
What a silly concept. Working across the aisle. Pshhh
They also presided over the tech bubble…I can’t recall if Coolidge had any technology shifts during his tenure…
Business cycles…
compromise is for losers…