Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Investment Falls Off a Cliff
Wall Street Journal Online ^ | 11/19/2012 | SUDEEP REDDY and SCOTT THURM

Posted on 11/19/2012 6:59:29 AM PST by The Sons of Liberty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last
To: kabar
A very fair and reasoned post. Really. One of the best I have seen recently. Backed up by fact, reasoned, researched. Thank you.

I have to take issue, however, with the basic premise upon which the framework rests.

"Far from being "worthless IOUs," the investments held by the trust funds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U. S. Government.

It is almost impossible to utter the above phrase with a straight face.

The bonds you speak of are worthless. There is no vault of money.

The bonds have to be repaid by collecting more general revenue taxes, by borrowing the money on top of Obama's soon to be $17,000,000,000,000 in debt, or by having the government spend less (not looking good there).

I must say you gave me a better understanding of the shell game played by Johnson and the Democrats in 1968, but the whole "off budge" three card Monty game does not impress me.

Imagine if you will a global currency collapse. Worldwide. Think Greece times 10. This is what is coming. Do you really think then when we reach that scenario (and we will) that the world will care whether SS was "on budget" or "off budget?" No - the entire US currency and economy will collapse just the same. The main three culprits to our debt are thriving: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. Add "Obamcare" to that mix very, very soon.


21 posted on 11/19/2012 10:26:08 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
"...Social policy was foremost national policy[1] and the social security system was primarily an instrument to lure the workers away from private and communitarian systems into the arms of the State. In the eyes of Bismarck it was the State that had created national unity and this agent was also needed in order to m..."

http://mises.org/daily/1275

22 posted on 11/19/2012 11:48:04 AM PST by Leisler (A trillion+ dollars a year printing fiat script=2% GDP. What happens when it stops. Or doesn't?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
It is almost impossible to utter the above phrase with a straight face. The bonds you speak of are worthless. There is no vault of money.

Using that logic, then all of those holding the $16 trillion US debt should indeed have pause, including the foreigners holding our debt (about 50% of the publicly held debt of $12 trillion.) Any T-bill issued by the USG depends upon the good faith and credit of the USG to pay the interest and principle.

The bonds have to be repaid by collecting more general revenue taxes, by borrowing the money on top of Obama's soon to be $17,000,000,000,000 in debt, or by having the government spend less (not looking good there).

That's the point isn't it? And it is not only repaying the bonds but the debt servicing costs that amount to about $300 billion a year now. If interest rates revert back to their historic norms of 4% or 5%, our debt servicing costs alone will amount to a $1 trillion a year in less than a decade. Imagine how to crank that into the federal budget. And remember that two-thirds of the budget is on automatic pilot. Congress only votes on about a third of it each year.

Imagine if you will a global currency collapse. Worldwide. Think Greece times 10. This is what is coming. Do you really think then when we reach that scenario (and we will) that the world will care whether SS was "on budget" or "off budget?" No - the entire US currency and economy will collapse just the same. The main three culprits to our debt are thriving: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. Add "Obamcare" to that mix very, very soon.

There is no doubt that the entitlement programs and other so-called mandatories are the drivers of our debt. And the costs are partly driven by an aging society. By 2030 one out of five residents of this country will be 65 or older as 10,000 people a day retire for the next 20 years. And by 2030 there will be just 2 workers for every retiree.

SS is fairly easy to solve. Medicare is almost impossible. Most people don't realize that the General Fund is funding an increasing share of Medicare--by law. The premiums charged for Medicare Parts B and D pay for only 25% of the costs. By law, the other 75% comes from the General Fund. In 2011 it was $222 billion from the General Fund and those numbers will continue to increase as the aging population increases along with healthcare costs, which are increasing faster than inflation. Medicare Part A has been running in the red since 2008. Hence, the cashing in of the IOUs in the Medicare Trust Fund (HI). Obamacare will increase the HI portion of the payroll tax, but it will only keep the HI Trust Fund alive for another 8 years.

Medicare is another Ponzi scheme along with SS.

This graph shows that the average man and woman (average defined in the study as average income over their working lives and living to the average life expectancy) who start receiving benefits in 2010 get over 3 times more in benefits than they pay in to the system! Of importance, the study accounts for inflation by calculating all past taxes and future payments in 2010 dollars to provide an accurate comparison.

If the notion that Medicare recipients are simply "getting back what they paid in" is false then where is the money coming from? Simply, the excess received is being borrowed from younger generations and the cost is more than we can bear.

Imagine if you will a global currency collapse. Worldwide. Think Greece times 10. This is what is coming. Do you really think then when we reach that scenario (and we will) that the world will care whether SS was "on budget" or "off budget?" No - the entire US currency and economy will collapse just the same. The main three culprits to our debt are thriving: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. Add "Obamcare" to that mix very, very soon.

I agree. The real question is whether the political will exists to reform these programs and do it in such a way that there not only be cost containment, but rather, changing the trajectory downwards. I am not very sanguine about that happening. Obamacare will just be another out of control entitlement program that will cost much more than originally projected as were Medicare, Medicaid, and SS.

There will have to be rationing of healthcare. The only question is who does it? The government or the insurance companies or the individual. The free market solution is the individual. I have a feeling that once Obamacare wrecks the healthcare delivery system and runs the insurance companies out of business, we will go to a single payer system run by the government, i.e., nationalized healthcare. That was always the objective. Obamacare was just an interim solution on the way to socialism.

This country is now in permanent decline. We will go out slowly but inevitably like so many other great nations and societies. All we are doing now is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

23 posted on 11/19/2012 12:04:50 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: kabar
There will have to be rationing of healthcare. The only question is who does it? The government or the insurance companies or the individual.

My prediction: someone will make a lot of money setting up hospital ships that operate offshore of the US, just outside the 12 mile limit. It will be just like the cruise ships that only turn on the gambling machines an hour out of port. It will be complicated to set up and balance practice standards against liability concerns, but someone will do it. Why travel thousands of miles for medical tourism?

24 posted on 11/19/2012 12:12:35 PM PST by Pearls Before Swine (/S?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine

We won’t have to. Just as is the case in the UK, we will have two healthcare systems—one for the general public and another one for the wealthy who can afford it. And you can guess which one will be better in terms of quality.


25 posted on 11/19/2012 1:10:28 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Just as is the case in the UK, we will have two healthcare systems—one for the general public and another one for the wealthy who can afford it.

I worry that what you say might be forbidden on the basis of the peculiar American obsession with "fairness." Sure, the politically connected will have better care, as in the old USSR. But, I'm not sure that the non-politically connected will be able to get it, even if they've been prudent in saving and could afford it. Obama's class obsessions might well put a mighty punitive tax on outside of the system care.

26 posted on 11/19/2012 2:06:23 PM PST by Pearls Before Swine (/S?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
Don't bet on it. We already have concierge or boutique medical care now.
27 posted on 11/19/2012 3:13:42 PM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Once again, a very fair, informed, and reasonable post. You make excellent points have have increased my understanding of several points. Thank you.


28 posted on 11/20/2012 5:15:16 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-28 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson