The reason I hold the fiscally conservative political beliefs I do has nothing to do with political parties. Really, I could care less if a Democrat or a Republican is in office. I don't hold an allegiance to either of those tribes. What I look for above all is a politician who is economically intelligent. I look for someone who may provide us a way out of the economic mess we are in, someone who will reverse this unsustainable fiscal course we are embarked upon. We are all in this mess collectively, regardless of political stripe, and I don't care where the solution comes from. I just want a solution. Lately, I haven't seen one. Lately, I've only seen politicians arrive on the scene who make things worse. Barack Obama is making our fiscal situation far worse. George W. Bush made our fiscal situation far worse. During the last couple years of his presidency, Bill Clinton and his GOP-led Congress actually made things a little better, however short-lived it turned out to be. As much of the country squares off along lines of left-right tribal warfare like a bunch of ignorant savages, the real threat to the future of America almost always seems to remain unaddressed amidst the partisan smokescreen. We fiddle while Rome burns.
An article in the Wall Street Journal called 'Taking The National Debt Seriously" outlines this unaddressed threat:
If you think those town hall meetings over health care were fierce, wait until Americans come to understand the threat to our national financial survival posed by the interest on the government's credit card.
When the government spends more than its revenue, there is a budget deficit. These deficits are paid for by Washington selling interest bearing Treasury securities. If the government were ever to default on its promise to pay periodic interest payments or to repay the debt at maturity, the United States economy would plunge into a level of chaos that would make the Lehman bankruptcy look like a nonevent.
It is the interest on the national debt that makes our future unstable. The exploding size of that burden suggests that, short of devaluing the dollar and taking a large bite out of the middle class through inflation and taxation, there is no way to ever pay down that bill.
As of Sept. 30, 2009, the national debt was almost $12 trillion and interest on that debt was $383 billion for the year, according to the Treasury Department's Bureau of the Public Debt. The Congressional Budget Office on Oct. 7 estimated the 2009 budget deficit to be almost $1.4 trillion (about 10% of GDP). In August, the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimated total government revenues at about $2 trillion. The revenue estimate included $904 billion from individual income taxes. This means the cost of interest on the debt represented more than 40 cents of every dollar that came in from individual income taxes.
Except for a few years in the late 1990s, for decades Washington has spent more than it has taken in each year and borrowed the rest. Taxpayer dollars that could have paid off debt each year have instead been spent on interest to finance debt. Unfortunately, that's a vicious cycle that will likely only get worse.
Imagine that. 40% of our individual income taxes did nothing but pay interest on the federal debt. None of that money paved a road, provided health care, went toward job creation, or helped a single American in any way. That is money we just throw away.
And the only thing our current President has done so far is to make it twice as bad as it was before he arrived on the scene. Get a load of this:
The OMB projects deficits of about $9 trillion over the next 10 years. If that occurs, the national debt will be almost $21 trillion by 2019. However, the actual amount could be much higher. The OMB also optimistically projects $13.5 trillion of revenue increases over the next decade, while minimizing the inevitable rise in interest rates that will come with an expanding national debt.
Forget the political rhetoric, no matter how soaring and inspirational it may sound on the surface. Forget the Democrat vs. Republican horse manure. We are heading for disaster. Look at the actions of our politicians, not the words, not the party. We don't function on hope. We function on a successful economic foundation. That economy is teetering on the brink, and was even before the current recession got under way. Our long term economic forecast would have to get better to be called dismal.
Here is will happen if we don't reverse course immediately, if not sooner.
In stark but simple terms, unless Americans are made aware of this financial crisis and demand accountability, the very fabric of our society will be destroyed. Interest rates and interest costs will soar and government revenues will be devoured by interest on the national debt. Eventually, most of what we spend on Social Security, Medicare, education, national defense and much more may have to come from new borrowing, if such funding can be obtained. Left unchecked, this destructive deficit-debt cycle will leave the White House and Congress with either having to default on the national debt or instruct the Treasury to run the printing presses into a policy of hyperinflation.
Faced with this ever-growing financial house of cards that we call America, what is our government doing ???????
Why, creating ever more social and federal programs we can't afford, of course. Massively EXPANDING the cost of government. The federal government is like Alfred E. Newman of Mad Magazine. "What, me worry ?" Our government is so out of touch that it can't even figure out what the real problem is, or if they do know, they won't admit to it. That would require HARD political choices, and our politicians know you don't get elected by making hard choices, you get elected by pretending to be Santa Claus, giving all the kiddies their presents for free. We don't have statesmen running things, we have carnival barkers. We have propaganda.
Wake up, America. Take your country back. Time is running out, faster than you know.


{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }
I agree completely. This shouldn't be a partisan issue. Unfortunately, its always easier for politicians to ignore the problem and harm future generations. The fact that spending is already uncontrolled and we expect to increase social and military programs by unparalleled amounts is both reckless and irresponsible.
We have no leaders in Washington willing to address this problem. I fear it will take a serious economic meltdown to force the politicians to try to fix this crisis. There are already weak signals that are being ignored – no one seems to think that even the thought of losing the dollar as the standard international currency is a problem.
When other nations don't need the dollar to be a healthy currency for their own self interest, I think we will experience inflation so acute that Jimmy Carter's presidency will look like the good old days.
I appreciate your blog post King. You try to strip away the partisanship and speak to the issue of the deficit. Good for you.
First, I would point out that you are quoting the Wall Street Journal, owned by Rupert Murdoch. Recently, I've had occasion to read the WSJ thoroughly, and I must say, it reads just like Fox News. So, no surprises there.
Second, I notice that the 40% figure is based only on income tax revenues ($900+ billion). Total revenues are $2 trillion. Big difference. That seems like partisan slant.
Lastly,….if you consider what is happening in California right now, you may see why cutting government spending right now is a bridge to oblivion. By California cutting so deeply, a spiral of even more reduced revenues has begun…..making their deficits even worse.
While I agree with conservatives that deficit spending is a problem that must be faced…..we've had this problem for quite awile and I don't think anyone should expect that it will go away in the near term. Where I disagree with conservatives is in the need for revenues through increased taxation on wealthier Americans. But I hear what you're saying.
If Obama didn't do the stimulus plan we would have been in much worse shape and this is a consensus by most economists. The stimulus package has been a accomplishment and not just for injecting money and confidence (just take a look at the stock market) But also towards turning things around from brink of disaster. Sure we like to have more jobs but that will come . Yes we have a huge national debt but if you recall it was Bush who took a surplus and made it into a debt . So if democrats trys to fix things by spending money that seems to bother a lot of people. If they proposes ways to save money long term on health insurance that bothers the republicans too.
Here's some articles for ya too
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jMNoef6xDenBbHWO0Im6rIjDmAgAD9B9P3L03
http://www.freep.com/article/20091012/NEWS15/91012023/1318/Transportation-chief–Obama-s-stimulus-plan-is-working-in-Detroit
When you have a sick child do you just leave them alone or go out and buy him some tylenol to to bring down the fever?
It is the worhtless U.S. Dollar dummy. I have been curious why our compassionate leaders have not educated us concerning the need for a large tax increase on oil. This huge government windfall is necessary for the government to accomplish three goals. 1. By stabilizing the cost of oil byproducts it would assist business in planning for the future. 2. A large and permanent cost in gasoline would force people to drastically reduce our individual consumption. 3. the windfall tax would be one more revune stream some of which could be spent advancing the green economy. It was finally exlpained to me why it has not been pushed. Our dollar is becoming worhless and as the world moves away from using the dollar as the world standard the buying power will be greatly diminished. The bigest impact may be the price we have to pay for oil. Once OPEC abandons the dollar they have no vested interest in supporting a strong dollar and its value will crumble. The end game will be accomplished .
America will not be afford to comsume the energy we currently consume and the economy may be destroyed but the more important goa lof stopping our damaging consumption of the worlds resources will be solved. Not saying I agree with the goal but to some it is the perfect solution.
http://costofwar.com/
Exactly Steve.
angry…you say some interesting and insightful stuff in your comment.
Not disagreeing here….just pointing out that a hefty increase in oil pricing through new taxation…..would fuel inflation mightily. I think you have your finger on something…..but if taxes on oil were imposed right now, I think it would be even more devastating to the deep recession we're already in. Thanks for your thoughtful and intelligent comment.
Andrea….thanks a bunch for those links.
Contrary to the mindless meme being spun by Fox and Fiends….the stimulus has saved and created jobs. Not enough, of course, but there's proof that it stemmed the tide. Much more of the stimulus money will be spent in 2010 and many more jobs will be created or saved…..proving that in deep recessionary times like we are in….Kenynesian economics, "government is the last resort for economic demand"….has been proven to be spot on. Just like that other liberal prize winner, Paul Krugman, said.
Nobody probably wants to hear this but the Free Trade Agreement is the major obstacle to recovery. It's all based on a section in The Wealth of Nations tht purports tp prove that tariffs are always an obstacle to maximizing production, but like all economic theories it's based on assumptions that eliminate anything detrimental to the conclusion sought. Economists also have no concept of time. For instance if China can build things cheaper than the US, what's supposed to happen is the price of labor is driven down in the US and will rise in China until China's advantage is erased. They don't say how long it will take. They also assume implicitly that China will take no steps to peg the exchange rate to keep it from happening, and they assume that labor is a freely negotiable commodity. Eventually ALL US manufacturing will disappear. those Lamborghini rims manufacturesd in Cleveland will eventually disappear and reemerge in Shanghai. The system is ghreat for brokers, bankers, retailers, etc. It's another high speed lane that ends at a cliff.
Very well said.
More and more we have a paper shuffling, transactional economy. Skilled and unskilled labor will never recover, the jobs situation will only worsen. 20% of the all national profits from GDP revenues came from the non-productive gambling casinos that are our country's banks and insurance companies.
Frye,
What you said ties in with well with my topic, and exposes another side of our national debt disaster. We need so badly for China to continue buying our debt that we aren't likely to change the terms of any trade agreements with them. They have us by the short hairs. We'll keep exporting our real economy to China, and in turn they will keep buying our debt (until we collapse).
Or, Congress could suddenly become honest and start dealing with the problem. I won't hold my breath waiting for that to happen.
angry c,
A number of liberals were calling for a huge oil tax last year, to drive up the cost of gasoline for the very reasons you stated. The recession killed that idea. The government is planning to shock the economy with big tax increases for health care this year. Then the government is planning to shock the economy with big cap-and-trade taxes. If there's any economy left after that, they probably will get around to the oil tax at that point.
Anything to keep the financial house of cards going for another few years.
And the dollar is going down the tubes. It's inevitable, given our federal government.
Adam Smith, after proving logically that trade restrictions are bad for business stated there should be exceptions to this policy, e.g. national security. His example was the Maritime Laws that favored British ships, shipyards and crews, because Britain's navy was vital to Britain. What was it that made the U.S. strong enough to win WWII? Factories. We need factories, smoke soot and all.
If the U.S. had entered into a WTO in the 20's Germany would have conquered England, completed their 'final solution' there and throughout Europe; Honolulu, Anchorage and Seattle would be Naval outposts of the Japanese Empire.
If the U.S. had entered into a WTO in the 1820, the South would have won the Civil War.
Prosperous banking and insurance industries do not contribute to national security all that much. Noisy smoky factories do.
these guys say what, me worry?
"Here, via Fox News, are some stats on the poor, starving health insurance executives who could be forced to prostrate themselves for the good of the general public. Poor guys. Give ‘em a break.
Health Insurers’ Executive Pay (2008)
Axis Capital Holdings Limited
John R. Charman
$41.6 M
W. R. Berkley Corp.
William R. Berkley
$29.2 M
Aetna
Ronald A. Williams
$24.3 M
MetLife
C. Robert Henrikson
$20.8 M
Chubb Corp.
John D. Finnegan
$20.1 M
American International Group
Martin J. Sullivan
$14.7 M
Everest Re Group
Joseph V. Taranto
$14.6 M
Commerce Group
Gerald Fels
$13.2 M
Prudential Financial
John R. Strangfeld
$12.9 M
Cigna
H. Edward Hanway
$12.2 M
Wellpoint
Angela Braly
$9.8 M
Coventry
Dale Wolf
$9 M
Health Net
Jay Gellert
$4.4 M
Humana
Michael McCallister
$4.7 M
United Health Group
Stephen J. Hemsley
$3.24 M
Frye,
I believe in free trade (under the guns or butter philosophy), but your point is well taken. Free trade has to be equitable, and exporting our real economy to China and other countries doesn't seem at all equitable. We're being sold down the river. Even in the health care debate, the best way to provide health care for our citizens is for them to have good jobs. JOBS is the real #1 issue, not health care. The growing health care problem is a byproduct.
It also occurs to me that the greenies don't want those sooty old factories in our country, and green is the predominant view these days.
walt,
So, you think a few hundred million in lesser insurance executive salaries will really make a difference in the $2.4 trillion health insurance industry ? Those salaries you listed make up about .0001 of health care costs. Without those salaries, a $5,000 annual health insurance policy would cost, um, still $5,000.
Walter has a point though. ( never thought I'd say that.) The Imsurance Industry wants credibility, but this erodes it. It's like the corporate jet thing for auto executives last summer. How about if we reestablish that 50% marginal rate around $5 million and a 70% rate around ten or twelve million. That doesn't sound too punitive to me. Those who are in that bracket might even find subtle ways to brag about it so it could become a prestige thing. The IRS could present them with a hero medal or maybe a bronze plaque (made in China to save the taxpayers' $$. Think how many of these things might begin sprouting up in Congress.
At the same time I'd give corporations a tax break by letting them figure their profits AFTER dividends.
Frye,
I wouldn't have a problem with raising the marginal tax rates on incomes that high, especially considering the debt this country is in.
It just isn't any kind of panacea for rising health care costs. It's a distraction from the actual health care issues at hand. It's used to paint insurance companies as evil, when they are not evil. They are providing a service. 99% of those who work for insurance companies are not rich. They are just trying to support their families like everyone else.
You're right, but an Insurance company is no substitute for a factory.
No argument there.
http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abo3Zo0ifzJg
Obama's economic team is a bunch of industry insiders. Nothing has changed.