« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Can the U.S. avoid bankruptcy?

The Congress doesn’t cut spending and balance the budget because they can’t. Not even if they remove every department and employee including the military.

So says Hal Mason in the shocking accompanying video titled, “United States Budget Dilemma.”

President Obama, in his proposed Fiscal Year 2013 budget, would spend $3.8 trillion. But the federal government will only collect $2.5 trillion in taxes, resulting in a deficit of $1.3 trillion. That $1.3 trillion is an amount larger than Congress appropriates to operate the federal budget.

The problem is easily stated; spending on mandatory programs and interest is greater than taxes collected. According to Mason, in order to balance the budget, Congress would have to raise taxes 50 percent or eliminate the federal government.

Watch the “United States Budget Dilemma” video:

Congress has failed to adequately address the problem by continuing raise the debt limit and borrow more and more until we now have a $16 Trillion national debt. $16 Trillion exceeds 100 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product and is 25 percent of the world’s gross domestic product. Worse the Democrat-controlled Senate hasn’t even passed a budget in over three years.

Back in February 2011, I wrote “Just How broke are we?” about Duquesne University Economics Professor Antony Davies’ analysis about the debt and unfunded obligations of the federal government totaling more than $64 Trillion. I asked Professor Davies about Molson’s video. He said the figures in the video match his calculations, which are straightforward. Professor Davies agrees, mandatory spending currently exceeds federal tax revenues, so shutting down the entirety of what most people think of as “the government” will still not balance the budget.

Professor Davies also explained that if current trends continue the U.S. will become operationally bankrupt in 2037 and will be actually bankrupt in 2047. And that ignores  the potential effects of ObamaCare.

Bankruptcy occurs when the annual interest on the debt equals federal revenue. At this
point, it becomes mathematically impossible for the government to avoid default.

Operational bankruptcy occurs when the annual interest on the debt equals federal
revenue less discretionary spending. At this point, it becomes impossible for the
government to fund anything other than mandatory spending (which includes welfare,
Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security, veterans services, and interest on the debt). Under
the Antideficiency Act, Federal agencies must cease operations (except in emergencies)
when they lack funding.

There is no easy answer to our budget dilemma. We must reform entitlements. As the Greek experience shows, any viable solution will be painful for everyone.

COMMENTS

  • Dave_A

    Looking at the history of monetary crises, there is always a political decision of sorts that precedes hyperinflation…

    No country has actually ‘spent itself into oblivion’ – that’s enough to cause problems but not enough – to date – for a currency collapse.

    It takes an act of extreme national stupidity – losing a major war (Kaiser’s Germany (as the parent-regime of the Wiemar)), destroying a key industry (Zimbabwe), or adopting pegged-valuation currency (to the dollar (now), or to gold/silver (pre-1930s))…

    We can now add ‘joining the EU’ to that list (as a form of pegged-currenecy), vis-a-vis the PIGS (who would not be in such dire straits if they still had their national currencies)…

    It’s from this history that I come to the conclusion (often posted here) that a functional market will NOT ALLOW hyperinflation to occur, and it takes an act of government that physically prevents the normal market-system from functioning, to cause it…

    Simply spending isn’t enough…. Loose monetary policy isn’t enough… You literally have to do something that abjectly breaks the market, and then it’s off to the races…

  • Dave_A

    No, it doesn’t.

    The FED’s actions don’t happen in a vacuum… They are making money available, but in many cases it’s not actually entering circulation… Also, a large amount of money was literally destroyed by the 2008 crash (new loans create new money via the multiplier, defaults and repayments destroy money by un-multiplying it), and much of the FED’s activity has gone into ‘filling the crater’ rather than actually creating net-new-money….

    In the end, the open market actually determines the money supply ‘size’… If there’s no demand (eg, if credit is still tight due to concerns about the future), the FED can offer all the money it wants, and there will be no takers… Hence, recession combined with extremely, unhealthily LOW inflation.

    It will be a very good day when we return to normal money-supply growth (3%/yr inflation)… Until then, don’t expect improvements…

    P.S. Inflation is only bad when it happens so fast that your money loses value before you can spend or invest it (keeping it in a bank account counts as a poor investment, but an investment none the less).

    People who refuse to do either (who keep large amounts of money as cash) are bucking the overwhelming market-trend & thus not worthy of consideration when making monetary policy.

  • Ausonius

    Many thanks for expanding your comments: yes, stupidity in governments is not unknown, and can lead to disaster! We shall see whether America elects a group of politicians determined to be stupid, so that Life can become fair …i.e. miserable for all.

  • Dave_A

    I don’t know if the diary system is fixed… But I’m working up something right now to post when it is…

    Related to the Left’s vision of the world & what it does to the average American & the white-picket-fence ‘dream’ we’re all raised to strive for…

  • Dave_A

    Simple way to handle that:

    Sunset date.

    If you’re born before that date you get a choice to keep the old system & pay the tax, or to forfeit claim to any benefits under SS & stop paying… As part of this promise, the trust-fund goes away & SS becomes part of the General Fund (So that every last refusnik gets their beloved SS for life, undisturbed)….

    Born after that date? It just doesn’t exist for you…

    At the same time, consolidate the laws providing for various IRAs into one ‘No taxes on any retirement savings (not tax-deferred, tax-free-forever), but you can’t touch it ’till 60′ super-IRA.

    Wind the beast down that way… There’s really no justification to have government retirement-insurance in this era of 401(k)s and E-trade…

  • Dave_A

    The ‘fair’ tax punishes participation in the economy, period. It is the worst-possible taxation system other than a capitation.

    Flat personal income tax is the only truly FAIR way to go – as it takes the same amount of TIME from each person (time being valued in terms of your annual salary) to support the government.

  • pjpetzold

    The Fairtax stops punishing investment, stops punishing people from succeeding, and you don’t pay one cent to the government until your family is taken care of. Can anyone argue that it’s more important to send money to the government than to take care of your family? Over time a flat tax would just revert back to the system we have now, because it is the EXACT SAME THING, except with different rates.

    The Fairtax also has the benefit of job creation. No business pays taxes. Period. If you want to see real economic recovery, and a second American Century there is only one choice for tax reform.

  • Dave_A

    The ‘fair’ tax punishes economic activity – you are rewarded for NOT buying new products or services, by NOT being taxed. This is NOT fair. People who participate in the economy should NOT be taxed more than hoarders & skinflints.

    The existing income tax we have ALREADY gives you deductions to ‘take care of your family’ (Something I disagree with – you can’t tell your bank or landlord ‘Sorry, can’t pay, need to take care of the family first’, so why should the government be any different? You owe money, you pay your creditors (all of them, private and public)… Before anything else…. Consider this before having a family…) – thus 49% pay NO taxes under the current system, largely due to the home-mortgage, child, and student-loan deductions, and the Earned Income Credit. To contrast the ‘fair tax’ pays you a ‘Super-EIC’ WELFARE check thus putting every American on the dole.

    Further, the ‘fair tax’ still taxes business, because it taxes them on everything they buy – you do realize that 25% of a company’s purchasing budget is likely MORE than their post-deduction income tax, right?

    Oh, and the argument about ‘over time’ applies to the so-called ‘fair’ tax as well – over time, it would devolve into BOTH an income AND a VAT/sales tax. It’s best to keep that door SHUT by NOT HAVING A NATIONAL CONSUMPTION TAX, PERIOD!

    THIS is real tax-reform:

    1) 0% Corporate Rate

    2) FLAT personal income tax – say, 10-15% (depending on what’s needed to be revenue-neutral) on EVERYONE, unless your income is so low that it costs more to tax you than you pay.

    3) NO deductions beyond personal business expenses (eg, net income). Not student loan interest, not mortgage interest… DEFINITELY not for having more kids…

    4) Elimination of federal funding for state spending. If it’s not an interstate matter (freeways, ports & commercial airports, military bases) , no federal funds. ESPECIALLY no diverting highway-trust money for urban mass-transit, or the diversion of use-tax money to fill the general-fund.

    If you want to live in the city (the most expensive & dependent lifestyle possible, government-wise – and I’m talking downtown condo-dwellers here, we’re not considering welfare cases), and have a train/bus/whatever, or be able to walk to work, have the police/fire/ambulance arrive in less than 5-10min instead of an hour… You can be taxed for it by that city… Move out of the damn city if you can’t afford the tax bill, don’t stick it on the rest of us who are already out….

  • pjpetzold

    We’ll probably have to agree to disagree about whether the pre-bate is a good thing. I personally think you should be responsible to your family first and only then asked for money from the government. It’s different from Mortgage etc. because you choose to have a mortgage, or what you pay in rent, while the government forces you to pay what they deem appropriate.

    Businesses are NOT taxed, because there is NO tax on business to business transactions, which means that taxes don’t effect their purchasing budget.

    The “over-time” argument does NOT apply to the Fairtax, because of the reason it can be called real tax REFORM. Part of the Fairtax, one of the most important parts, is that it cannot go into effect until the 16th Amendment is repealed, which then stops us from having an income tax at the same time.

    Disagreeing is one thing, it’s another to criticize a plan you don’t know the details of. There’s three books on the subject, and the Fairtax is the most researched plan for tax reform in existence, with more than $22 million spent on research showing that it would be the fairest, most effective tax system and be the least damaging to our economy. Any tax system will contribute damage to the economy. However, it’s a necessary evil. The choice is which of these evils is least?

  • Pingback: - Tea Party Tribune