A Dem, an Indep and a Rep agree: Government spending levels are unsustainable

[theorangebluewinagain]

Please Read and Listen
When are we as a society going to stop stealing from our children and grandchildren? It is shameful people

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-0...ster-wheel-wil

First, the country's existing entitlement programs are not just unaffordable, they are also profoundly unfair to those who are taking their first steps in search of opportunity. Social Security is one example. According to Social Security actuaries, the generational theft runs deep. Young people now entering the workforce will actually lose 4.2% of their total lifetime wages because of their participation in Social Security. A typical third-grader will get back (in present value terms) only 75 cents for every dollar he contributes to Social Security over his lifetime. Meanwhile, many seniors with greater means nearing retirement age will pocket a handsome profit. Health-care spending through Medicare represents an even less equitable story.

The government has an obligation, of course, to support needy seniors. But this pension system is ripe for common-sense reforms, including changing eligibility ages and benefit structures for those with greater means, ridding the Social Security disability program of pervasive fraud, and removing disincentives for those who would rather work in their later years. Powerful, vested interests portray reformers as avowed enemies of seniors. But, the status quo is, in fact, tantamount to saddling school-age children with more debt, weaker economic growth, and fewer opportunities for jobs and advancement.

Second, while many in Washington pay lip service to the long term, few act on it. The nation's debt clock garners far less attention than the "fiscal cliff" clock. Elected officials continue to allow the immediate to trump the important. Washington appears poised to forego fundamental reform at the altar of the expedient, yet again. This could have tragic consequences. In successive administrations, the country has spent trillions in temporary tax credits and short-term "stimulus" to goose growth by the next election. What do we have to show for this spending surge? Modest growth, declining incomes and a level of national debt that undermine our long-term prospects. The Federal Reserve's policies reinforce this short-term orientation. To offset weak economic conditions, the Fed's principal policy objectives appear to be twofold: suppress interest rates and raise stock prices. As a result Congress may be missing market signals and failing to see the costs of its spending addiction in time to undertake real reforms. Ultimately, economic fundamentals—not the promises of central banks—will determine the prices of stocks and bonds.
But the deeper failing is one of essential fairness. The benefits of rising stock prices accrue to those who have already amassed wealth at the expense of those who are struggling to save. And failing to deal with runaway spending will burden the country's children with higher interest rates and a debt bomb that will come due in their lifetimes.

Third, too many politicians appear more eager to divide the spoils of electoral victory among their own than to increase the size of the economic pie for all. The grab-bag of special tax favors under the guise of the recent fiscal-cliff deal is only the latest example.
Crony capitalism and corporate welfare aren't just expenses we cannot afford. They are an anathema to economic growth. They deny opportunities to aspiring people and companies who seek to better their lot. They ration opportunity based on things other than merit and hard work. They further ensure that poor children—who already are disadvantaged by failing schools, inadequate health care and little access to necessary resources—will never get the chance to break the cycle of generational poverty through education.

[GatorFanCF]

The answer to your question is in the article: when the bond market blows up, interest rates normalize and there's so much money being spent on interest payments that we cannot continue with everything else is when we stop stealing from future generations. In other words - "when it's too late."

[G8trGr8t]

it took about two weeks for the bond market to collapse im Greece. When it happens, it happens quick

[gatorman_07732]

When Obamacare kicks in next year we will hit the point of no return

[chemgator]

The solution to Social Security is simple: let the people vote on the solution (mid-term referendum). It has to be a combination of one or more of the following solutions: delayed benefits, reduced benefits, and higher taxes. Exempt people within four years from seeing their benefits delayed or reduced.

Take the percentage of people that vote for each solution, and multiply it by the amount of change it would take to solve the problem. If it would take a 4-year delay in benefits to solve the problem, and 50% of the people vote for it, then delay benefits 2 years. If it would take a 1% increase in taxes (from 6.2% to 7.2%) to solve the problem, and 20% of the people vote for it, raise taxes 0.2%. If it would take a 10% reduction in benefits to solve the problem, and 30% of the people vote for it, cut benefits 3%.

Repeat the referendum every 20 years. Keep Social Security separate from the rest of gov't spending.

[T3goalie]

OBWA- The concept of Stealing from children and grandchildren is not acknowledged or understood by most. Those that do understand don't care because of their self indulgence. Passing the bill to a someone else is not only OK but has reached an art form. Did you not know that the future generations owe us? F-Them seems to be the theme of the day... Sad truth is people don't care.

[gatorpa]

Originally Posted by chemgator

The solution to Social Security is simple: let the people vote on the solution (mid-term referendum). It has to be a combination of one or more of the following solutions: delayed benefits, reduced benefits, and higher taxes. Exempt people within four years from seeing their benefits delayed or reduced.

Take the percentage of people that vote for each solution, and multiply it by the amount of change it would take to solve the problem. If it would take a 4-year delay in benefits to solve the problem, and 50% of the people vote for it, then delay benefits 2 years. If it would take a 1% increase in taxes (from 6.2% to 7.2%) to solve the problem, and 20% of the people vote for it, raise taxes 0.2%. If it would take a 10% reduction in benefits to solve the problem, and 30% of the people vote for it, cut benefits 3%.

Repeat the referendum every 20 years. Keep Social Security separate from the rest of gov't spending.

IT WILL NOT HAPPEN, the grubby pols just use it as a new piggy bank

[chemgator]

Originally Posted by gatorpa

IT WILL NOT HAPPEN, the grubby pols just use it as a new piggy bank

The piggy bank has already been emptied out. I am not suggesting that we refill the piggy bank (too expensive), just make sure that it pays for itself over the long term and doesn't have excess cash or a shortfall.

Same argument for a gas tax that pays for roads (it would only be another $0.20/gal). Any time in government that you can collect a tax that pays specifically for something related to what is being used, keep the item separate from income tax and general spending.

[PSGator66]

Obamacare will cripple this nation.

[DeanMeadGator]

Originally Posted by GatorFanCF

The answer to your question is in the article: when the bond market blows up, interest rates normalize and there's so much money being spent on interest payments that we cannot continue with everything else is when we stop stealing from future generations. In other words - "when it's too late."

Blessed be our children, for they shall inherit the national debt. We will rightly be held responsible for the ruination of their economic futures.

[Dreamliner]

The answer would appear to be, don't let the people vote on anything. Based on the most recent poll I've see the people are THE problem. A majority don't want ANYTHING cut.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Government spending levels aren't necessarily unsustainable. Government spending margins are absolutely unsustainable.

[gatorpa]

Originally Posted by chemgator

The piggy bank has already been emptied out. I am not suggesting that we refill the piggy bank (too expensive), just make sure that it pays for itself over the long term and doesn't have excess cash or a shortfall.

Same argument for a gas tax that pays for roads (it would only be another $0.20/gal). Any time in government that you can collect a tax that pays specifically for something related to what is being used, keep the item separate from income tax and general spending.

Although I agree with the premise, the elected theives will never do that, never.