Expect the unexpected.

Monday, August 02, 1999

Expect the unexpected. Throughout life that piece of advice has been handed down to me from sages of many shapes and forms, whether my mother, teacher or a passing bum.

&uot;Always be prepared,&uot; they told me in scouts.

&uot;Always stand to the side when doing this,&uot; they told me when I was learning new medical procedures in the emergency room.

&uot;Always take extra pictures,&uot; they told me when studying photography.

Always expect the unexpected – it’s a rule that seems all too true when looking at finances. And, it’s a rule that’s a hard one to learn.

Since I was 13-years-old and working summers in various fields and on a half dozen farms, I had a problem with that concept.

Each May, as the work started, I’d figure out how much my bank account was expected to swell by the end of August.

After all, it was $5 an hour for 10 hours a day, five days a week, with more than three months to work. Additionally, there were lawns to mow on the weekends and homes to help paint when I had spare time.

I was going to be a teenage money-making machine; I saw a future filled with bulging bank accounts.

Then, summer progressed.

The bulges weren’t as big as expected.

Unexpected spending seemed to pop up out of nowhere, whether it was bike repair, a new gadget I &uot;had to have,&uot; or added costs of the unexpected summer vacation.

By the end of summer, I had about enough to buy school clothes and maybe one special item to help me get through the winter – until next summer when I’d really work to build up that savings.

Now, I no longer make $5 an hour, so saving shouldn’t be a problem.

But, the expenses have risen. Uncle Sam now wants a bite, my parents aren’t paying my rent and buying my food and it costs a bit more to keep up a car than a bike.

So, once again, the words of advice are always expect the unexpected.

With that in mind, all a person can do is budget and hope to put something away for retirement on a regular basis.

While I think toward the future, I no longer look a year ahead and promise myself I will have a huge bank roll in 12 months.

Unfortunately, our nation’s lawmakers can’t say the same thing.

But, they’re not looking 12 months ahead. They are looking 120 months ahead.

Granted the differences between my budgeting and federal budgeting are vast because they have a team of educated accountants and experts and I’m stuck with a $1.25 calculator.

But, the differences in unexpected expenses are just as vast. I may spend a bit on car repairs, but how much will the federal government need to spend on Social Security repairs in the coming years?

Will more money be needed for education programs, military spending, health care or even the upcoming census?

None of this seems considered as lawmakers push for drastic tax cuts, trying to take a bite out of the estimated $3 trillion surplus.

Republicans say it’s better to use it to reduce the taxpayers’ tax burden, because they believe the Democrats will spend it if it’s put in a savings program.

The thing the GOP seems to forget is they control the legislature with a slight majority. The Democrats can’t create new spending without the help of at least a handful of Republicans.

So, the immediate need isn’t as immediate as the conservative lawmakers would have us believe, unless they don’t trust their own spending habits as well.

But, what about future elections?

The GOP keeps telling us tax cuts and no spending is what Americans want. They’ve repeatedly informed us we are more conservative than their liberal opponents.

If that’s true, why would they worry about a turn over in the House or Senate?

If the majority of Americans think the Republican way, the seats should be safe and if Republicans can be trusted not to raise spending, any federal savings should be safe.

Maybe expect the unexpected thinking is aimed at an unexpected urge of Republicans for pork-barrel spending and catering to special interests? Politicians will be politicians.

Still, it would seem logical not to make plans for drastic tax changes based on a 10-year estimate, an estimate our own tax-cut supporter, Sen. Rod Grams, said is too long term.

Instead, it’s logical to plan a smaller cut and use any surplus outside the Social Security trust fund for paying down the federal debt.

Instead of leaving future generations a legacy of parents with new gadgets paid for by tax cuts, let’s leave a legacy of a debt-free nation.

Maybe it’s not as popular as politicians look toward an election year, but it is keeping in mind the unexpected.

Instead of spending what we don’t have, we are helping make our country more secure for unexpected costs or economic downswings in the future.

Still, I’m sure many disagree. They are demanding a giant federal tax cut.

They are expecting lawmakers to cut the costs of government, while also saving Social Security and not limiting any current programs.

To those people, there is only one thing to say.

&uot;Expect the unexpected.&uot;