Conservative News Daily

Congressional spending has plagued us for decades, starting in 1971.

Endless Congressional Spending Has Been​ Plaguing Us for Decades: It All Started in 1971

The U.S.⁢ national debt has increased⁢ by $300,000 since ⁢I began‍ writing this sentence. ⁢Every 30 seconds, another $1 million tacks onto a debt that now⁣ exceeds ‌$33 trillion.

In other⁢ words, it takes ‍the average American years — in most cases, many years — to ⁣earn what runaway government spending ‍adds⁢ to the national debt ⁤in mere seconds.

These numbers defy​ comprehension.

While most Americans seem to understand that this level of spending has a direct bearing on their lives, they ⁢do not necessarily understand why or how it came to be‍ this ⁤way.

In short, blame ‌ Richard Nixon.

On Thursday, an innocuous video⁣ shared on‍ the ‌X platform prompted a brief exchange between two social media influencers, one⁣ of whom traced the origins of our present situation to​ the third ⁣year of Nixon’s presidency⁢ — 1971.

Wall Street Silver, an account with more than 1 million followers, posted an 18-second ‌clip of‌ a young-ish woman holding a coffee and explaining to ⁤an interviewer that‌ she⁣ and others in her age group have⁤ suffered financially.

“I think our generation completely got screwed,” she ⁢said.

“I ‍don’t think our parents realize how‍ difficult it is — I mean, everything right now, definitely post-pandemic, it’s just –it’s crazy.‌ Like, I’m working 45 ​hours here, but I still have to ask ‍my parents for help living here ⁢by myself,” the woman said.

Wall Street Silver wanted⁤ to know why.

“Are they‌ correct? Is it tougher now? Or are ⁢they making bad decisions about their ​career choices? Both?” the account asked in the accompanying post.

End Wokeness, an account⁣ with 1.6 million followers, responded with a different question: “Where did it all go wrong?”

Wall Street Silver had an answer, and it was a good answer.

“When Nixon ended ⁤the gold standard for our currency in 1971. This enabled ​the Congress⁢ to⁣ spend and start having ⁢ridiculous ⁢deficits to fund ⁤ wars and⁣ social spending. Many stats measuring quality of life became⁣ worse starting approximately ‌in 1971,” the account replied.

This connection between runaway government spending and Nixon’s 1971 decision to take the‌ U.S. off‌ the gold standard ‌is not a new one.

For​ instance, on Aug. 15, 2011,⁢ Charles Kadlec marked the 40th anniversary of Nixon’s fateful‍ decision with​ a devastating opinion piece ⁤in Forbes titled “Nixon’s Colossal Monetary Error: The Verdict 40 Years Later.”

According to ⁤Kadlec, Nixon’s⁢ abandonment of the gold standard led to “the worst 40 years in American economic history.”

That history includes the Great Depression,⁤ so the‌ eye-opening assertion ​required explanation.

In short, since 1971, ⁤the U.S. had seen “1% slower growth under the paper dollar system” compared with previous decades, Kadlec⁤ wrote.

This depressed growth⁢ rate had catastrophic consequences. At⁣ pre-1971 growth, the U.S. economy would have been $8 trillion ⁣larger by 2011. At that rate, ‍family incomes would have nearly doubled their⁣ 2011 median.

And what is the relationship between diminished growth and deficit spending?

Pre-1971 growth rates​ also‌ would have produced a 50 percent larger‍ tax base. This⁢ would ​have led to a “bounty ⁤of tax‍ revenues that would make the current and projected fiscal challenges ⁣manageable without ⁣severe spending cuts or ​growth killing tax increases on working Americans,” Kadlec ​wrote.

Do you ⁢think moving off the gold ⁣standard was a bad idea?

function‍ ffp_getCookie(cname) {
var name=cname + “=”;
var decodedCookie=decodeURIComponent(document.cookie);
var ca=decodedCookie.split(‘;’);
for(var i=0; i

That kind of opportunity cost helps explain why, despite ⁢living in the ⁤richest country in the history of​ the world, ⁤many ‌Americans — including the woman in the video — feel that things ⁤have gone‍ wrong. They are worse ‍off — substantially ⁤worse⁣ off — ‍than they should be.

Perhaps the best way to​ think‌ about ⁣the​ gold ⁤standard’s importance is to ​recall what it did,‌ as well ⁤as how it made people think and behave.

Before 1971, the⁤ gold​ standard guaranteed that⁢ paper money had some⁢ backing. Something besides its mere existence gave it⁣ value.

This had the salutary⁢ effect of making⁤ people⁣ think and act as if scarcity ‍existed. Value had meaning, ⁣in which case‌ spending more money than you had on hand could produce devastating consequences.

In 1917,‍ for instance, President ​Woodrow Wilson asked Congress ⁢for a declaration of war against Germany. He then asked ⁤that the⁣ cost of‍ the war “be sustained by the present generation, ‌by ‌well ⁣conceived⁤ taxation.”

“It is our duty, I most respectfully urge, to protect our people so far as​ we may against the ​very serious hardships and evils which would be likely to ⁤arise out of the ⁤inflation which would be produced by vast loans,” Wilson ​said.

Likewise, in his 1989 farewell‌ address, President⁣ Ronald Reagan spoke of something he​ wished had been ⁢different about his two-term presidency.

“I’ve been asked if⁢ I have any regrets. Well, I do. The deficit is one,” he said.

Reagan hailed from a ​different era. ⁣Elected officials no longer talk⁤ that‍ way. They have no reason to do so. After all, our debt has grown to such ‍proportions that no one need feel responsible for it.

Readers might raise one objection — that is, populists historically have appeared to ⁣argue against the gold standard.

For instance, most⁤ have heard of then-Democratic presidential nominee William Jennings Bryan’s powerful 1896 “Cross of Gold”⁤ speech.

“Having⁢ behind us the commercial interests‌ and the laboring interests‍ and all‌ the toiling masses,⁤ we ‌shall answer their demands⁢ for⁣ a gold standard by saying⁢ to ​them, you shall ‌not press​ down upon the brow of‌ labor this crown of thorns. You shall not crucify mankind upon⁢ a cross⁢ of gold,” Bryan thundered.

His words, however, should not⁣ mislead us. The Populists of the 1890s sought silver coinage, not‍ fiat ‍money. They‍ knew that ​paper money needed backing, and they‍ preferred bimetallism to ‌gold alone.

Furthermore, they understood that government debt redistributes wealth upward. Indeed, debt⁣ crushes workers.

“We denounce⁤ the‍ sale⁢ of bonds and the increase ⁤of ⁣the‍ public interest-bearing debt⁢ … as unnecessary and without authority‌ of law, ⁣and demand that no more⁤ bonds be issued, except by specific⁣ act of Congress,” the 1896 Populist‍ Party platform read.

Thus, to review, the ​gold standard preserved the value of paper money. Nixon’s decision destroyed​ that value and led ⁢to ‍diminished growth. The ⁤tax​ base ​shrank, and deficits surged.

Worse yet, public officials stopped thinking in terms‍ of scarcity and fiscal responsibility. They borrowed, printed ⁢money, made endless‌ war and⁣ enriched themselves.

One can hardly imagine⁢ a more shameful legacy.

It all began in ​1971, and we ⁤have our national debt to prove it.

The post Endless Congressional ​Spending Has Been Plaguing Us for Decades: It​ All ‌Started in 1971 appeared first on The Western Journal.

How can fiscal responsibility and accountability be implemented in Congress to ⁣address the growing national debt?

Infrastructure/” target=”_blank” rel=”noopener”>tax⁢ increases,” Kadlec explained.

But instead,⁣ we have endless‍ congressional spending⁣ and a national debt that seems to ‍have no limit.

It is important to note​ that the connection between ⁤Nixon’s decision and ⁤the current state of our national debt is not a direct one.⁣ There have been numerous factors and policies‍ that have contributed to ⁤the growth of⁣ the debt over the decades. However, Nixon’s decision to ​end the gold standard was a pivotal moment that set the stage for the excessive spending that followed.

By severing the link between ‍the U.S. dollar and gold, Nixon allowed the government to print unlimited amounts of money without the constraint‌ of⁤ a ⁣fixed value. This ⁢gave Congress the power to spend without worrying ⁢about the consequences of their actions.

Since 1971, the national debt has grown at an alarming rate. It has become a burden for future generations who will have ‍to⁢ bear the weight of ⁤this accumulated debt.⁢ And despite numerous promises from politicians to address the issue, it seems that the cycle of endless spending continues.

So what can‌ be done to address this problem?⁤ One possible solution is to implement⁣ fiscal responsibility ⁣and accountability in Congress.⁢ This means making tough decisions about spending,⁢ cutting ‌wasteful‍ programs, and finding ways to reduce the deficit. It also means enacting policies that promote⁣ economic growth and reduce ⁤our reliance on debt to fund government operations.

Furthermore, there should be a renewed focus on⁤ educating the public about the ‍consequences of excessive spending​ and the importance​ of fiscal responsibility. It is crucial that Americans understand the impact that their ​government’s ⁢actions have on their own



" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Back to top button
Available for Amazon Prime
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker