Romney, Big Bird & Bin Laden

“I’m sorry, Jim. I’m going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I’m going to stop other things. I like PBS. I love Big Bird. I actually like you, too. But I’m not going to — I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it.”

- Mitt Romney, at the debate, October 3, 2012.

Three questions.

1. Romney's method of choice for financing government expenditures, 
2. His grasp of numbers, and 
3. His focus and priorities.

First, Romney's method of choice for financing US government expenditures.

Romney said,

"I’m not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for it." 

I don't understand why China - or more accurately, bond holders in China - is Romney's method of choice for financing US government expenditures. What's wrong with borrowing money from bondholders in England? US Bondholders? Or taxing US taxpayers for US government expenditures? (That is, after all, what it means to “Balance the Budget.”) Looking to bondholders in China - which is the Chinese government or Chinese Communist Party - seems to be one of those “Entangling Alliances” that Pres. Washington warned us not to get into. 

Second, his grasp of numbers.

The Federal Budget for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting is $338.9 million for fiscal 2012 - $338,900,000. That's a lot of money. However, the Federal Budget of the USA is 3.5 Trillion - $3,500,000,000,000.

Budget

PBS:        $338,900,000

USA:  $3,500,000,000,000

Diff: $3,499,661,100,000 - which rounds to $3.5 Trillion.

The funds allocated to the Public Broadcasting System are 0.00968% of the Federal budget - a rounding error. Looked at another way, recognizing that the population of the US is roughly 307 million people, the Federal budget is roughly $11,400.65 per person. The funds allocated to PBS are $1.10 per person. Without PBS: the budget is $11,399.55. 

Per Capita

PBS:       $1.10

USA:  $11,400.65

Diff: $11,399.55

So either Romney can't do math, which, I think, suggests that he'd not be a very good President, or he has another reason for wanting to eliminate PBS, one that he should share with the taxpayers.

This brings up Romney's focus and priorities.

Gov. Romney may have a good reason for wanting to eliminate PBS, and he may be thinking like an investment banker, thinking that CPB operates at a financial loss; that there's no quantifiable return on investment. I think this was how he operated as Governor of Massachusetts. And it suggests, to me, that he would not be a good President, at best like Herbert Hoover, at worst, like George W. Bush.

Remember what Romney said in 2007?

“It's not moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person.” 

This may be why John McCain was the Republican nominee in 2008. And as Biden said,

“We will follow that SOB to the gates of hell.” As Biden said, more recently, “Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive.”