Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.


In 2015, about 65% of the entire federal budget of $3.8 trillion was spent on entitlements like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, housing assistance, and such. But this can’t possibly be the cause of the national debt and permanent deficit spending. No – of course not. It’s the Trump tax cuts that are killing us. The fact that they’re only months old is completely immaterial.

The socialist Nanny-State has been constructed over a period of about 80 years, where as tax cuts have been few and far between, happening only four times since JFK initiated the first. Yet are we expected to believe that it is not entitlements which are blowing up the budget, but tax cuts.

Trending: Immigration: There’s a BIG Difference between Then and Now!

Now what idiot would believe such a thing? Unfortunately, considering the source of the claim, many will tend to believe such a ridiculous assertion.

take our poll - story continues below

Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?

  • Is Biden's Vaccine Mandate Unconstitutional?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

And the source is none other than Janet Yellen, former Chief of the Federal Reserve. She also served as Chair of President Bill Clinton’s Council of Economic Advisers – so she’s got that going for her.Yellen recently penned an Op-Ed in the Washington Post, along with four other “economists,” entitled: “A debt crisis is coming. But don’t blame entitlements.” All five are former members of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, for either Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. In other words, all five are leftist political swamp dwellers.

Naturally these esteemed economists (probably all Keynesian) would never blame government entitlement spending. Tax cuts, on the other hand, deprive government of needed funds.

Long, long ago, in a nation seemingly far, far away, Ben Franklin wrote:

“I am for doing good to the poor, but…I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed…that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

<span data-mce-type=”bookmark” style=”display: inline-block; width: 0px; overflow: hidden; line-height: 0;” class=”mce_SELRES_start”></span>

Those days are long ago extinct. We now treat “the poor” in an entirely different manner, and it is mostly due to a simple change in language.

The left effectively won this argument, as they often do, just by commanding the language we use. Social Security was the original “entitlement,” owing to the fact that one at least paid into the system, so therefore was “entitled” to withdraw from it at a later date.

But today all government give aways, assistance and welfare are now “entitlements.” And what makes people think they are entitled to other peoples’ money? A simple shift in language. Those who control the language, control the dialogue and ultimately the agenda.

A good explanation of this control of agenda is base line budgeting, where the government’s base line or floor for spending automatically increases every year. With this system, there can be no debate about cutting spending or shrinking government. The base line is set and there is no dispute beyond how much or how little the budget will grow. And it never grows just a little.

The same can be said of entitlements. The word “Entitlement” has become the base line. Once this word was established as the base line for all government assistance, there can be no debate beyond how much to increase that which one is already entitled.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and are not not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

The Common Constitutionalist

Brent Smith, aka The Common Constitutionalist, is a constitutional conservative who advocates for first principles – the founders' original intent and enemy of progressives. He is former Navy and a martial arts expert. Smith considers himself just an average Joe with no formal journalism background – but rather than simply complain about the state of our nation, he took to the Internet to battle the left.


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Need help, have a question, or a comment? Send us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.


Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?

Send this to a friend