It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

$11.4 trillion national debt? no, how about $100 trillion

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321


fast forward 70 or so years and ask this question: What is the mathematical predicament of Social Security today? Answer: The amount of money the Social Security system would need today to cover all unfunded liabilities from now on—what fiscal economists call the “infinite horizon discounted value” of what has already been promised recipients but has no funding mechanism currently in place—is $13.6 trillion, an amount slightly less than the annual gross domestic product of the United States.


In other words, if we payed for "70 or so years" of SS TODAY, it would cost 13.6 trillion dollars.

If we payed for "75 years worth of all parts of medicare," TODAY, it would cost 34 trillion dollars.

Fortunately, in 75 years time, the economy will grow, the money supply will grow (as it has been and always will); in other words: Today's debt becomes cheaper tomorrow.


My question to jam321, is why are you trying to book 75+ years worth of expenses, not account for changes in the economy or value of the dollar, and pay for them today? I'm not noticing any consideration for any other factors that can offset the costs, making them appear less scary.

Then again, it's much more fun to just think the world is ending, than be realistic about scare stories in the news. I'm sure WSJ thanks you for the advertising revenue.




posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
reply to post by jam321


fast forward 70 or so years and ask this question: What is the mathematical predicament of Social Security today? Answer: The amount of money the Social Security system would need today to cover all unfunded liabilities from now on—what fiscal economists call the “infinite horizon discounted value” of what has already been promised recipients but has no funding mechanism currently in place—is $13.6 trillion, an amount slightly less than the annual gross domestic product of the United States.


In other words, if we payed for "70 or so years" of SS TODAY, it would cost 13.6 trillion dollars.

If we payed for "75 years worth of all parts of medicare," TODAY, it would cost 34 trillion dollars.

Fortunately, in 75 years time, the economy will grow, the money supply will grow (as it has been and always will); in other words: Today's debt becomes cheaper tomorrow.


My question to jam321, is why are you trying to book 75+ years worth of expenses, not account for changes in the economy or value of the dollar, and pay for them today? I'm not noticing any consideration for any other factors that can offset the costs, making them appear less scary.

Then again, it's much more fun to just think the world is ending, than be realistic about scare stories in the news. I'm sure WSJ thanks you for the advertising revenue.


Here are the reasons this total needs to be looked at now.

1. Since 1968 the government has run a deficit every year but 2000
This is a very good indicator there is no desire to pay down any of the debt.

2. Check out how much health care costs have increased in the last 10 years - they have more than doubled. Remember this is 69% of the future obligations, it may very well be underestimated if this trend continues. Then realize that the numbers due to baby boomers who will be receiving medicare will be the highest ever.

3. We are getting very close to losing our triple AAA rating, and obviously the more risky the debt is percieved the less we will get for it when we sell it, which means we have to issue ever more to get the same return. In other words our debt load is already near the tipping point where investors are begining to question will the U.S. government really be able to pay up without massive inflation.

4. Your assumption that our economy will grow is by no means a sure thing. China is becoming the world power, we are losing the reserve currency, our economy is based more on consumption then production, and our education system is terrible, which will defiantly slow our share of innovation in the future.

It is true the government will always be able to pay whatever the debt is by simply inflating the currency to whatever they need to. What you don't seem to get, is the American people still pay for the debt whether it goes away through inflation (the destruction of the value of their property), or through taxes. This will effect every citizen in a major way one way or another.



posted on Jun, 18 2009 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Kaytagg
 


First of all let me thank you for bringing a good debate to the thread I am enjoying you views and side of the article very much


You should come and join us in the Market data thread,

Everybody else thanks for the input I appreciated that very much but I already familiar with many of you.

Now lets go back to the discussion at hand.

When the article talks about the numbers it very clear said, that and I quote,


If you account for all unfunded liabilities – Medicare, military pensions, etc.


will add to more than 100 trillion dollars.

By past experiences the government has been very good at hiding the real numbers when it comes to the economy, unemployment and anything that is linked to how government spend and how much this will affect the tax payer.

I never has trusted the MSM but I don't trust government numbers either

Our deficit and predicted budgets expenses are right now unpredictable how unpredictable that no even Obama can figure how much money he will be spending still fixing the economy while adding to the unsustainable deficit (in his own words).

Already no been in office 6 month and he had committed over a 1 trillion dollars to fix the economy and lower the deficit but that is also misguiding because he has been increasing government at an alarming rate.

Now how can that add to the so call deficit reduction, bigger government and hiding the facts of how this nation spends on programs that are ongoing.

Perhaps you believe that numbers are misguided because the MSM but I also believe that numbers are misguided and sugar coated when it comes to government figures.


[edit on 18-6-2009 by marg6043]



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join