Filed in archive by andy on June 26, 2005

Here's a provacative piece from the NY Times. Author daniel Akst argues. given the alternatives, "Perhaps it's (our failure to save) something closer to rational profligacy."

Here's a chesnut I can fully agree with:

Everyone needs a rainy-day fund, of course. But if we really want society to save more, we have to stop penalizing thrift, stop taxing earned income and stop the federal deficits.

Just be careful with this line of thinking:

First, how can anybody take savings exhortations seriously from a government that seems to revel in fiscal profligacy?

Sure you can optimize rational behavior based on federal law (think the tax code), but don't take this notion further, to the point where your are looking to the federal government for all the answers. The heavy lifting is up to us as individuals. If you think the collection of elected officials in Washington truly have your individual best interests in mind all, or even most, of the time I've got a bridge for you in my backyard.

Related Entries:

Save Less Some Say - 28 June 2005
Couldn't Save This For Friday - 27 July 2005
A New Way To Save - 16 March 2007
Picking Save The Dates - 26 March 2007
Home Business Frugality: Save Money on Utilities - 27 May 2007

« The Chinese Are Coming, T... | Main | It Really Is Coming (Chin... »

Permalink: To Save or Not To Save

Tags: saving government

Trackback: http://publish.creative-weblogging.com/publish/mt-tb.pl/7320

Addthis

Ask

Blinklist

del.icio.us

Digg

Fark

Facebook

Google

Lycos

Ma.gnolia

Mr Wong

Netscape

Netvousz

Newsvine

StumbleUpon

Slashdot

Tailrank

Technorati

Wink

Yahoo

Vote for To Save or Not To Save:

Currently 8.00/10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Rating: 8.00 out of 1 vote(s) cast.

Response from: jiggs (12/09/05 5:05am)

I perfectly agree although I am not judging the government for their tasks with regards to budget. But, understand too that the pain is mostly felt by citizens of this country. So better act on this problem.