$546,668 Per Household ...

[Tim Liston]

Maybe you have that kind of money laying around. I don't.

Leap in U.S. debt hits taxpayers with 12% more red ink

The cost keeping our promises to retirees, medicare and social security recipients and the like now equals $546,668 per household.

I have written about this obviously unfulfillable obligation here before. Do you have any idea how to fulfill this obligation?

Obviously there is no way.

[ryan costa]

we will have to be more like Norway.

most economic growth is inflation anyways.

The numbers measure what's needed today — set aside in a lump sum, earning interest — to pay benefits that won't be covered by future taxes.

why should anything earn interest? they're going to have to switch to something closer to a pay-as-you-go federal tax and spend mentality.

fortunately there is an enormous housing surplus in this country. Americans will have more money to devote to taxes when they don't have to shovel money into appreciating housing/rent costs.

[Charlie Page]

Pay-as-you-go only keeps us even.

More federal income should be put towards retiring the national debt and paying back all those IOUs from social security.

The fed needs to spend less than it takes in.

Annual federal spending should be no more than 75% of income each year.

[ryan costa]

More federal income should be put towards retiring the national debt and paying back all those IOUs from social security.

Annual federal spending should be no more than 75% of income each year.

That is a good idea Charlie. Unfortunately the standard practice of reducing annual deficits is pilfering more from the Social Security Surplus(and raising social security tax rates:Reagan Administration). this amount is usually deducted from the officially reported annual deficit. Ravi Batra claimed this was technically illegal in his book "Greenspan's Fraud". I forget which law he cited.

in the good old days tobacco and alcohol were taxed to raise federal revenue and state revenue.

Oil and Coal is even better than tobacco and alcohol for having a good time! These could be more heavily taxed. It would theoretically raise revenues, spur conservation of fossil fuels, and reduce carbon emissions. It may be political suicide though! the voters are irrational. the congressmen are irrational. the speech-writers understand this.

Instead Congress is working for some kind of "carbon offset swap" trading boondoggle. it sounds like the kind of thing Enron engineered in California before gouging california for electricity. It sounds like the kind of mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps our most intelligent financiers invented before running so many banks and abstract financial corporations into the ground.

[Charlie Page]

Unfortunately the standard practice of reducing annual deficits is pilfering more from the Social Security Surplus(and raising social security tax rates:Reagan Administration).

I know you’re not a Reagan fan but he was attempting to be at least somewhat responsible by raising the social security tax rates. He (or someone) had the foresight to see that the baby boomers would bankrupt the system in its then current format. He raised SS tax rates so the system would achieve stability when the boomers retired. I guess he didn’t have the foresight to see that congress would increase it’s pilfering accordingly.

in the good old days tobacco and alcohol were taxed to raise federal revenue and state revenue.

Oil and Coal is even better than tobacco and alcohol for having a good time! These could be more heavily taxed. It would theoretically raise revenues, spur conservation of fossil fuels, and reduce carbon emissions. It may be political suicide though! the voters are irrational. the congressmen are irrational. the speech-writers understand this.

Instead Congress is working for some kind of "carbon offset swap" trading boondoggle. it sounds like the kind of thing Enron engineered in California before gouging california for electricity. It sounds like the kind of mortgage backed securities and credit default swaps our most intelligent financiers invented before running so many banks and abstract financial corporations into the ground.

Tobacco, alcohol, coal and oil continue to be taxed. Obama increased the cigarette tax not too long ago.

Cap and trade is the boondoggle you are referring to. I don’t know too much about it but it sounds like some kind of wealth transfer scheme sold by saying it’ll clean up the air. Areas of the US with lots of sun and wind will benefit while densely populated areas with less sun and wind will get the short end of the “trade”. This will ultimately get pushed down to the consumer through higher prices. The Federal bureaucracy created to manage this boondoggle will cost hundreds of millions (if not billions). Not to mention the subsidies to the poor because they can’t afford to buy their alcohol, tobacco AND pay the utility bills.

[ryan costa]

Social Security should always have been a pay as it goes policy.

what did they intend to store surplus social security funds in? what do you do with a trillion dollars? A giant piggy bank? REITs? the Stock Market? it would have inevitably been some kind of financial instruments lent or leveraged to some other activity. They can claim that wasn't reagan's intention. but it was the immediate outcome, the expected outcome, the continuation of the preceding condition.

oil should be taxed to cover the entire cost of the Iraq invasion and occupation. rising oil taxes would increase federal revenue, reduce the deficits, and spur conservation and investment in "new technology".

[Charlie Page]

what do you do with a trillion dollars?

Live for today and spend it....we'll worry about the consequences tomorrow...tomorrow...tomorrow. We are running out of tomorrows.

oil should be taxed to cover the entire cost of the Iraq invasion and occupation. rising oil taxes would increase federal revenue, reduce the deficits, and spur conservation and investment in "new technology".

Maybe we should take Iraq’s oil...isn’t that why we went to war?

Raising oil taxes won’t reduce the deficit or debt...congress would spend the money irresponsibly. However, it would spur conservation and investment in “new technology” and when that new technology is widely used, congress would tax that too. I'm sure they could figure out a way to tax the sun and wind.

[Will Brown]

If they keep passing out money at their recent pace, that half million dollar figure will be inflated into pocket change.