Interesting commentary by PIMCO's Bill Gross.

www.finance.yahoo.com

Yeah, I just saw and read that.

Folks, I am NOWHERE near as smart or as well versed on this subject as Bill Gross is.

His take is... stark.

Here's the article, please read this:

�No Way Out� of Debt Trap, Gross Says: U.S. Living Standards Doomed to Fall
Posted Mar 08, 2011 09:00am EST by Stacy Curtin

link

Debt, debt and more mounting debt is plaguing countries around the globe.

In this U.S., states across the country face a collective $125 billion shortfall for fiscal 2012, while Congress is facing a budget gap nearly 10 times that size.

PIMCO founder and co-CIO Bill Gross has previously said that if the United States were a corporation, no one in their right mind would lend us money. For the last decade, we�ve been �relying on the kindness of strangers� to help cover our debts, he tells Aaron in the accompanying clip.

By �strangers� he is referring to our foreign counterparts, like China for example. Basically, for years Americans have spent their hard-earned dollars on less-expensive Chinese made goods. With great gratitude, China turned around and used all those dollars to buy up U.S. Treasuries and other dollar-denominated assets.

But now after years of reckless spending, America�s debt level is nearing a breaking point and can no longer rely on foreign capital as a last resort. �When a country reaches a certain debt level, confidence in that country�s ability to repay that debt becomes jeopardized,� says Gross, citing the work of Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart in This Time Is Different.

The Way Forward...And Your Pocket Book
The budget crisis situation unfolding at the state and federal government level does not bode well for working men and women in this country. There are really only two choices, says Gross. And, neither favors your pocketbook:

Option #1 � Keep spending and do nothing
Option #2 � Balance our budgets by cutting entitlements
House Republicans ran and won on a platform to cut $100 billion from the budget this year and last month managed to pass legislation that would strip $61 billion in spending.
But for President Obama and Congressional Democrats, those cuts go way too far at a time when the country is still struggling to recover from the worst recession since the Great Depression. Goldman Sachs and Bill Gross agree and have warned that cutting too much could stifle growth. (See: Gross "self sustaining" clip)


Meanwhile, neither side as gotten serious about reforming entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare, which account for more than a third of Uncle Sam's budget.

If the country cannot come to grips and cut back on entitlement programs, U.S. debt will continue to grow and governments around the world will loose faith in the U.S. dollar. Foreign goods would become more expensive, says Gross, while our standard of living would drop.

Under the second option, if entitlement programs are cut, many Americans would naturally have to learn to live on less and take a hit to their standard of living.

�There is really no way out of this trap and this conundrum at this point,� says Gross. From an investment perspective his advice is to stay clear of �bonds in dollar denominated terms� and to be �wary of higher interest rates going forward.�

Under the second option, if entitlement programs are cut, many Americans would naturally have to learn to live on less and take a hit to their standard of living.

Which is what needs to happen.

I responded on a Casper Star Tribune article the other day where the whiners were complaining about Wyoming rejecting the federal government extension of the unemployment benefits. There are plenty of job here to be had. They just don't want to work. Both the energy industry and road construction industry need people. Instead these weasels sit and bithc about the government teat being cut off.

Cognitive dissonace of all. Someone said folks travel in herds, go crazy in herds, then regain their senses slowly and one by one. There is an endgame to this ongoing stimulus the size of which has never, ever been seen before.

Nature don't tolerate vacuums too well and that vacuum is gonna be filled. Yet the market roars onward.

Read between the lines, and don't concentrate so much on the entitlement piece, but the foreign lending to maintain budget levels, and the default/credit rating risk.

THAT'S the story within the story.

We are just the 'least dirty shirt in the closet' among the debt laden bunch.

I saw an interview with Bill Gross the other day and his comments were along the same lines as in the above article.

It got me thinking about rising interest rates, bond rates etc.

I could be entirely wrong on this but I don't think the fed will raise interest rates by any substantial margin anytime in forseeable future. They can't afford to with the overwhelming debt that our country currently has.

Oh I realize that Sean....but the idiot whiners posting on that blog would not understand that. I was pointing out how these people focus only on their own plight and won't help themselves......no way they could look at the big picture.

Sorry to interupt......

but, I seriously doubt cutting entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare are where the main savings will come from. They are miniscule reimbursements given to retirees in gratitude for the efforts they had put into our countrys economy. Maybe limiting proceedures and monies paid in Medicare to regulate costs might help. But dont take away the only light at the end of the tunnel from some of our fellow workers.

Now cutting welfare and revamping that system you got a big Amen! Just because you have a child that's "slow at reading" shouldn't give you the right to a $230 a month comp check and a significant bump in your food stamps..

Welfarers tend to live life better than most blue collars due to stuff previously mentioned.

Another big hit to our financial eco-system is our prisons, non tax paying but benefit getting illegals, oh yeah and the Democrats for allowing it........

They (FED) wont have to. The bond market will do it for them. Think........Greece. Think.....China. This ain't about us anymore. It's about them.

some have been trying to explain this here dating back to '08 at the least


tis why I'm bettin with my own money that pm's have a good ways to go to the upside



the hole has been dug too deep


can't be sure if that's daylight up above us or some chinaman shining his flashlight down the hole wondering where his fing money is

Yep.. And until and unless the morons in Congress understand that AND actually cut programs across the board by serious levels, plus refusing to raise the debt ceiling and ignoring all the whining and crying that's sure to follow - that hole will never get filled in..

The writing is on the wall. China is moving to position the yuan as the new world reserve currency. Opec is also looking to remove the relationship between oil and the dollar. I'd say that conditions are ripe for something to happen in the near future and the result for the American people will not be good. Check this out:

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pro/1011PSIENDVD/WPSIM304/PR

Not pointing this at anyone, but rather offering a counterpoint to Bill Goss' analysis.

#1) No way and no how can the purchase of US Treasury bonds by the Japanese and Chinese (the two who carried the flag for so long) be contrued as 'kindness'. It was their way of propping up the system and maintaining a stronger dollar than market forces and reality would have given on their own. The purchase of treasuries was done to maintain an artificially low level of their own currencies. It was not kindness it was mercantilism. Beggar thy neighbor tactics straight out of the textbook.

#2) There is another way to address the budgetary woes, a few actually. The entitlement crisis is a health care crisis plain and simple. The medical profession and the insurance industry has figured out how to avoid market forces on their salaries and bottom lines respectively. This is no accident as it was, IMvHO, a reaction to the desire of Americans to find some way to minimize health uncertainties. Although the recent healthcare bill does make some gains on the bottom line costs I believe, it does so in a way that allows the medical profession and the insurance companies to remain insulated. It is I believe a mess.

Secondly, steps could be taken to ensure that the bad debt in the system could be put back onto the offending parties. Creditors being insulated from some losses and hiding others is what has caused this mess to extend out over years with no end in sight. This alone would revitalize the US economy and lower the stress levels that the system is under. Real live naturally occurring growth (from the demand side up) would do wonders to set government balance sheets right. What was have now is artificial growth produced by showering those at the top of the pyramid with money. This is what QE1 and QE2 were all about. It is just like inflation, the way it affects the system depends on whether it comes from the demand side of the equation or the supply side.

Thirdly, steps could be taken to eliminate trade surplusses produced from currency manipulation and tariffs. This would result in a strengthening of foreign currencies and a blow to their export driven models. It is what needs desperately to be done. It would also knock the stuffings out of guys like Goss who get rich off of an artificially high dollar. It is no wonder he avoids mentioning it.

All in all it is part of the story but leaves out the most pertinent parts.

Will

Japan has nearly 3 times our debt to GDP ratio and they still can borrow and they still have a high standard of living.

India, Germany, France and Canada all have higher debt to GDP ratios than the US.

Their standard of living isn't falling precipitously.

#2) There is another way, a couple actually. The entitlement crisis is a health care crisis plain and simple. The medical profession and the insurance industry has figured out how to avoid market forces on their salaries and bottom lines respectively. This is no accident as it was, IMvHO, a reaction to the desire of Americans to find some way to minimize health uncertainties. Although the recent healthcare bill does make some gains on the bottom line costs I believe, it does so in a way that allows the medical profession and the insurance companies insulated. It is I believe a mess.

My dear Pengy,

If I'm reading you right, you are waaay off base on this one. Allow me to speak on behalf of Medical Community. Medicare is killing Healthcare. You read that correctly.

Since 1965, Medicare has reimbursed at a rate that only covers about 80% of the cost of providing a procedure. For the logic impaired, that means they lose 20% for every procedure they do. In the early years, the numbers on Medicare were small and posed no burden, but that changed quickly as the ranks of the 65+ year olds swelled. MD's then banded together in groups, shared facilities, and extended their hours to cover the loss.

As the rates were cut and more patients enrolled in Medicare, they have been forced to delegate more of the work to nurses and physician assistants. They have been forced to shift costs to other patients who are not on Medicare. Insurance companies who are in the business of collecting premiums and keeping as much as possible (yes, that is what they do for profits) are in turn trying to limit their expenditures. Meanwhile, salaries for MD's are shrinking. Pediatricians and Internists are struggling to make 6 figures. That is hardly Robber Baron type of compensation for the cost of the education and years they put in. Not every Tom, Dick, and Harry has the smarts to do it.

My MD friends tell me straight out that if their entire practice was based on the Medicare reimbursement, they would be closed in one month. They can't cover the overhead on Medicare reimbursements. Can't pay the salaries, can't pay the healthcare ins. for their own staff, can't pay the rent.

As Washington cuts Medicare reimbursements more, you will see a drop in service, and ultimately see MD's opt out of Medicare entirely! You will very well see a time when you are 65+ and you can call every Internist in your area only to find they no longer accept Medicare. You won't have a family doctor!

So it's not the greedy MD's or insurance companies, it's simple economics and government social engineering that has brought us to this point.

They get 80% of billed expense which is an entirely different thing from 80% of actual costs. I have spent way too much time seeing how business billings are constructed to believe otherwise. And the medical profession has learned how to pass those unfilled billings onto other parties.

One thing that is killing healthcare (insofar as its success rae in providing good care at a reasonable cost) is that the business spent 50 years constructing the system so that it limited the amount of health care practioners. This was done in an attempt to limit supply and run up salaries. In the past decade or so the industry has backpedaled from this stance but the damage is done. From accreditation standards to curriculums to residency it is one big roadblock to reacting to the market signals to expand supply. IOW the industry has been wildy successful at limiting supply and raising salaries.

Insurance companies are a topic unto themselves. My opinion of how the industry is run lies just a tad below repo men and used car salesmen. It is a racket.

In the end we are going to have to raise the supply and lower costs. And that means doctors making less money.

Will

The economic train has already left the station. There are very few options left to stop the train wreck that is coming the next five years.

Doc

Actually, no, we are not.

We rank #5 as far as countries with the highest percentage debt to GDP (that have not defaulted at least once already - taking out some "notorious" African nations). Only Greece, Ireland, Japan, and Germany are ahead of us on that list (having higher percentage debt to GDP). Germany is not far ahead, and we will likely pass them this year or early next. All three of the other nations on that list are 100%+ debt/GDP. We're at 80%+ and rising fast.

True, but their exports off set their debt to GDP ratio.

Doc

Would you please cite where you got those numbers, as they differ considerably from the numbers I've seen recently.

Has anyone blamed Bush or the unions yet?..............grin

Getting there.....

Outstandin

At this point, who/what GOT us here is merely anectodal to how to get out, or what happens if/when we can't.

There'll be, and is, plenty... correction: PLENTY... of blame to go around, but that doesn't change the facts of the situation.

This is where I got those figures.

http://www.visualeconomics.com/gdp-vs-national-debt-by-country/

And here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_by_public_debt

And here.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html

Repub congressman from Pa. (I believe) yesterday on CNBC as a morning guest stated we were presently at a ratio of 25% debt/GDP - and - rising. Further stated that at 20% we'd be in good shape did the economy keep improving thus raising the GDP side of the ratio equation. BUT he is a politician.

Incorrect. National debt is over $14T; GDP is just over $15.3T.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt

As of February 28, 2011, the Total Public Debt Outstanding of the United States of America was $14.19 trillion and was 96.8% of calendar year 2010's annual gross domestic product (GDP) of $14.66 trillion.[1][2][3] Using 2010 figures, the total debt (96.3% of GDP) ranked 12th highest against other nations.

Look here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USDebt.png

Like Rand Paul said "We can't keep borrowing money from China, to give it away as foreign aid."

No matter the % the fact is that Japan and other nations carry a significantly larger debt to GDP ratio than we do and still maintain high standards of living and still have a functioning monetary system.

As typical, the Paulistas are nowhere near factually accurate:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fy2010_spending_by_category.jpg


And, http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/01/06/us-usa-aid-factbox-idUSTRE6054DT20100106

A literal drop in the bucket when compared to the budget, and the interest payments alone on the national debt.

Less than 1% of the US budget is foreign aid.

Many studies have shown recently that Americans vastly overestimate the amount of foreign aid the US provides.

Penguin.
Not only doctors, but don't forget nurses and drug companies. I'd say drug companies are the worst of the lot. I've gone to the vet many times for certain Rx. I don't give a chit if it's illegal, the difference in price was absolutely jaw dropping. When I lived in San Diego I didn't have any friends that were vets so I bought prescription drugs in Mexico. Couldn't help but notice same manufacturer as the 2 options I had back home... and these Mexician purchases were "fit for human consumption" same as 1 of my 2 options back home...


2 other things I thnk are necessity and will help tremendously with the so called national debt. Domestically produced energy and drugs.

Billions and billions of dollars flowing to arab nations (who hate us and want us destroyed) for their oil. Producing our own would keep that money here. And billions and billions going to mexico (who hate us and want us destroyed) for their illegal drugs.

Producing our own would keep all that money here. Circulation of currency is mandatory. Needlessly sending it beyond our borders is extremely foolish.

Plus it'd help cut the throats of both of them by taking wealth they depend on to continue cutting our throats, which both (for different reasons) fully intend to do. Picture perfect examples of our wealth being used against us. Amereicans are going to consume energy and Americans are going to consume recreational drugs. It's time to stop behaving like children living in fantasy land. Time to face the facts and do what we should have been doing all along. Produce our own and keep the money here.

And welfare, and the cost of operating the government...... 62% of the Federal Budget consists of Social Security, Medicare, and Defense. Can't solve any problems without looking at those three. Or paying more in taxes.

nsagam;

Please check the chart in the wiki link that I put up.

In 2011, only Greece, Italy, and Japan are anticipated to have higher percentages of debt/GDP.

We know about Greece. Italy is right behind them. Japan is a HUGE exporter, and we buy a ton of their schit; keeping them afloat. They also owe the money to themselves (via citizen investments in gov't debt as part of their SUBSTANTIAL individual savings percentage and assets), and I'd hazard that their economic system isn't nearly as stable as you think it is.

Not "or", but "and".

ps

Foreign aid is a few measly billion.

Right.
What's zero minus a billion equal?

Billions add up. It's time to keep every single one of them possible.

Then I'm sure you've been watching with keen interest how Bachmann is taking on Capitol Hill today.

No.
What am I missing?

Why do we give any foreign aid, when we cannot even fund our own domestic programs? I don't care if it is only 1%. Got to start somewhere...

Nothing if Bachmann is talking!
JMHO

Here you go,Archer. Play close attention to the dem spin.
===================

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ress-block-105-billion-health-law-money/

================

I know it's your humble opinion and all but read the article and tell me if it's nothing.

Probably because we see a return on our investment in the form of more stable and more friendly governments. This pays dividends in many ways, primarily military.

Yep, I heard her screeching about this all Sunday morning. She even had a nice little visual aid on MTP.

I'm embarrassed she's from MN.

JMHO

Because some of that foreign aid is a helluva lot more effective and better for us than some of those domestic programs.

I'd rather HAVE an Israel than not. I'd rather HAVE a developing South Africa with positive trade relationships with us, than not. Of course, I'd helluva lot rather NOT have drug addicts, drunks, and illegals on SSI/Medicaid, or murderers, rapists, and drug dealers sitting around in prison for decades when they'd be better for us as fertilizer.

Start by cutting the BIG problems, and often a lot of the little problems take care of themselves.

I'm thinking you have far more to be embarassed for being from MN: http://franken.senate.gov/

I'd say on top of complete intellectual dishonesty, it should also be embarrassing for you to see such deceit and thievery by the dems and dismiss it because of the sound of someone's voice.

Let me see....Bachmann v. Pelosi,Clinton and Napolitano? Let me take a nano-second to figure that tough one out!

Oddly enough... I'm reminded of a few billions given to Sorros for deep drilling off coast of Brazil.

that article probably warrants its own thread.

At any rate, all this spending has got to stop. Who could disagree that it is insanity defined?

Option #1 � Keep spending and do nothing
Option #2 � Balance our budgets by cutting entitlements

The other option that should scare those up north.....

Option #3- Trade significant land mass of Alaska to pay off the debt.

Huh?
Graphic View of 0bama's Budget

The US government might have determined that an influx of doctors was needed, I never stated otherwise. What I did state was that the profession, and the AMA, determined that it was not in their best interest to have this happen. They very actively, and until the last decade or so publicly, took steps to limit the anount of doctors. You don't have to take my word for it as it is a matter of public record.

They argued for longer periods of schooling, longer periods of residency, and limited numbers of classrooms and clinics where residency could be performed. Don't take my word for it look it up. Hell the AMA had it as a stated goal for decades to limit the amount of doctors in order to raise wages.

As for the IQ thing... are you hinting that you believe my profession to be one of the ones that the 'less than bright' can excel in? Do you know what I do?

How to get more doctors. Do you think it is wise to have general practitioners having the same long road to travel as those going into surgery and/or research? Do you think it is wise to have the state boards who grant accreditation and licensing to be staffed by the doctors themselves? Ever heard of a conflict of interest? Market entry restriction?

The shortage of doctors is one of the most serious problems with healthcare. Another is the complete lack of market forces that can be brought to bear when it comes to dealing with life and death issues. There are more than a few. But as far as I am concerned the doctors played their part to bring this problem on and are fair game. The status quo is a sordid mess and needs torn down.

As far as I can tell doctors and lawyers have been wildly successful at insulating themselves from global market forces. Fair enough, but don't complain when those of us who work in professions, where everything from immigration policies to tax policies have been rigged to drive down our standard of living, balk.

When I see the AMA and dotors take concrete steps to address manufactured market entry restriction, license and accreditation dustortions, and classroom seat/clinic size restrictions I'll lighten up a bit. The profession brought it on themselves with a lot of help from the insurance industry.

Will

Be careful of that which you so fervently hope for.

Just don't get pisssed off and leave again. We need your sanity here and also your suggestions. Though some might see them as "dark", I don't. I think most of your stuff is spot-on and have said so for a long time. We need some straight talk.

Spot-on assessment of one of the problems in the medical industry regarding the education of doctors. The same problem exists in many other sectors as well and the cost of education/training has skyrocketed. Many folks are forced out because they realistically see no way to recoup the investment of time/treasure in any decent timeframe.

I think doctors who personally live it and experience it are not only more than competent to assess the issue but also rather credible.

I'd love to know how my bud Will formulated the thoughts premising his assertion "lawyers are wildly successful at insulating themselves from global market forces."

Anyone can fix the deficit!! People here won't like the resource but here's an interactive puzzle that lets YOU FIX THE BUDGET PROBLEMS. At least it will give some thought about how we can do it.
There's not much doubt in my mind that if our political parties wanted to work together it could be done.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/11/13/weekinreview/deficits-graphic.html

As far as the debt goes, IMO it's hopeless. Neither the people nor the politicians of this country are willing to suffer the consequences of correcting our spending.

No stomach for hiking the painful road out of this.

It will be marginally adressed but the real cuts that could save us will never be enacted, it's gonna crash down around us and then it will be too late.

JM

Sorry, Will, but I for one am not interested in LESS qualified Drs. Hatari has it right.

I will agree that there is a financially incestuous relationship between insurance companies and trial lawyers. No insurance - no big malpractice settlements. No big settlements - no need for big insurance. Politicians are poised to be in both sets of pockets.

Will, you seem like a fairly bright boy (even if your reply hinted at a bit of insecurity), but I can tell you have very little understanding of what goes into providing the best healthcare. Ya ever cut into anyone - on purpose?

You don't reform a system by putting only those already in that system in charge of the reforms.

You don't put only ex-teachers, et al on a school board.

knowwhutimean?

The trouble is John, that those who are all about "pain" and "austerity", etc. are the ones who will be little effected by it or who already are so well off that losing some won't matter much. To wit: I have a lot more sympathy for some Joe Sixpack who has been working, paying his bills, etc. and who is about to lose his job and everything else with it, than I do for some GM exec who took the Golden Parachute when the bailouts occurred.

I guess I'd agree were that the case.

It's going to affect everyone, from the little guy to the corporate big wigs. Of course, the poor and middle class will suffer the most.

Nobody will benefit from what's going to happen if we continue ignoring the pink elephant in the room.

You are correct.

Nope. All concerned nations will agree to a "soft, gradual default", gradually forgiving and forgetting and letting the music continue, hopeful that one wont squeeze the other's nuts too hard and cause runs. Loose cannons will be quickly corralled. This ain't like the Weimar Republic, Argentina, Russia, LTCM, or the Asian Contagion. Too many sitting at the same fire drinking the same brew to let it all go astray. Meanwhile, all commodities will continue their rooftop prices and possible revolts and riots will likely follow from that.

We all agree, surely we do, that doctors, their fees, insurance companies caused this possible worldwide debacle, right? Or so it would appear.

There are certainly more causes than docs and insurance companies.

The American people's insistance that the goverment provide for their every need is the leading cause.

Politicians who dangle the carrot of new social programs, faux stimulus programs and more handouts to their constuituents is a leading cause.

Our continued refusal to face the fact that we have bankrupted our nation by instituting wasteful programs, the toleration of corruption and special interest groups will just lead to a deepening debt, until the bubble bursts and every one is asking what the [bleep] happened?

JM

It is more constructive and easier to understand how to neuter our debt monster if we don�t leave out the percentages.

Our debt is huge and getting bigger at a faster rate.

As of February 28, 2011, the Total Public Debt Outstanding of the United States of America was $14.19 trillion and was 96.8% of calendar year 2010's annual GDP of $14.66 trillion.

Scary stuff.

But we have been there before, that is about the same percentage as 1944 at 93% of GDP, thanks to the war and FDR�s �Stimulus Package.�

It topped out in 1946 at about 122% of GDP.

BUT�during the Eisenhower years it started dropping like rock.
By 1974 it bottomed out at 32% of GDP. Thanks Wikipedia for the numbers..

If we fixed it then�we can fix it now
Without selling Alaska or Yellowstone Park.

For sure Obama is stuck on Stupid and doing his best to break the old records.

But the 2011 Tea Party House has shut him down and in 2013 we can begin to fix what we have fixed before�several times before.

Ross Perot would say ~Get under the hood and get to work~

The things that would bring about the desired results in healthcare are, the application of market forces to the provision of healthcare (Docs know what it costs and patients have motivation to ask) and the redirection of the civil justice system away from rewarding lawyers and insurance companies to making doctors accountable via their licensure. I would also make it easier for hospitals and health providers to collect from folks (who can afford insurance) they are MANDATED to treat.

I paid several decades worth of malpractice premiums and was never terribly motivated in my professional behavior by the thought of my insurance provider paying a claim. With me, it was personal. And were it not, I would have been much more motivated by the possible loss of my license.

Elected officials and the average man on the street were much different then Bowsinger. They lived thru the depression and hard times.

We now have minorities and ignorant whites that think you have money as long as you have checks...

Different time with a completely different moral and ethnic make up of the general population.

The WWII generation understood sacrifice and hard work. Not so anymore.

Just look around, people will riot and march over any percieved reduction in government benefits. Ie. Wisconsin.

Quite so! We have degenerated into a society that believes in political power through pandering - as long as we are the johns.

How?

My recollection is that tax rates were relatively high during the 1950's during the Eisenhower era. If that is the fix it aint gonna happen, neither party has the political will to raise tax rates. (or make significant cuts in spending.)

Stay tuned. Both are about to happen...by necessity.

I lived thru the depression and hard times, of course as a two year old, there was a lot going on that I did not fully understand yet.

However, by the time of the Korean War I was a teenager and had it all figured out.

I hope we don't get to take that class again... but I'm afraid we are heading there if some drastic changes don't happen soon.

May already be too late. As we weaken economically, our enemies will become embolden, further taxing our military and budget.

Very large bombs being dropped can both save us the money of full scale deployments and get our point across.

Sounds mean but I don't give a schit about our enemies survival, just like they don't give a schit about ours.

JM

Actually, I'm trying to help you out. Your supposition does not fit with what is happening in doctor's offices all around the country. They are not raking in the dough. Compensation is falling, the cost of education is approaching the absurd. Doctor's are hardly getting rich. Sure, there are a few that do well, and they earn it. Surgeons do better but they have an extraordinary skill.

What I'm telling you is that if you try to flood the market with more MD's, prices won't fall because the overhead of running an office is fixed. What is the overhead in running your Internist's office? I bet it's around 75%. You want to cut there fees? By how much? 20%? 5 percent is not enough cushion to run a small business. Smart people like you will not devote 10 years to study, accumulate a mountain of debt to struggle. Like you, they will find another path. This idea will actually create a shortage of MD's. The profession will no longer attract the best and brightest. They will find a better alternative, and there is no alternative to the best and brightest to take there place, unless you drop your standards.

Will, sit down and actually talk to some of your home town Docs and ask them the challenges medicine faces. You will come away with a completely different perspective. I'm not out to dog you or confront you, but I hate to say you've got this one picked wrong.

Just headlined on Drudge:

Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages

What impeccable timing...

It's really going to get interesting when the old folks have to choose between eating and paying the property tax on their house that's been paid off for 25 years.

Some are at or near that point now.

Was jokin, John.

=================

I guess they could buy food with their SS checks if they were hungry.

As in satisfied and homeless.

Reverse mortgages or equity lines,baby!! Pull out 80% equity and then default.

,...and ignore their propery taxes?

With the inflation rate that's brewing as a result of the Fed's reckless ways, not to mention the upcoming tax increases, fixed income people are going to feel the cold very sharply.

Property owners and 401k folks are on the short lists for getting zapped.

Issac is right about reverse and bail.

What is the approximate math on real estate taxes? I should know this...is it approximately 1 1/4% percent on the current FMV,current FMV less cost basis or the original sale's price?

I pay 4500 per year on our home. Not enough to starve over,B!

It would take Mom and Dad over two months to garner that much from BOTH their SS checks. That's a long time to go hungry.

Wonder what folks in Illinausea think about that?

Lots of places in Tx. are limited to 5%/yr increases - even - in the face of declining values.

Louisiana is cheap and we get our money's worth. heh.

How many months to actually pay their actual real estate taxes, though?

I feel sorry for folks who planned to survive their later years on SS alone.

There's a bunch of them for sure. Not going to be pretty.

Their taxes as opposed to yours? Prolly about one of their two monthly checks. But they live in semi-shixthole, Kansas and not Georgetown bro.

There's really no way for working class people to "plan" for an intentional debasement of the currency.

Agreed but, if you're sitting on a paid off home and not letting that equity work for you, you've missed your turn along the way!

Planning is easy. Doing is another thing.

with a reverse mortgage, you might see 50% of whatever the bank determines your home is worth and that's if you hold a free and clear title. The bank can also make a laundry list of items they want fixed before you get the money.



As for a line of equity, a person on a fixed income will have a hard time qualifying based on their debt to income ratio. A person making $1,500 a month in SS isn't going to be able to borrow very much even if they have no other debt.


I understand the need for some taxes but I'll never agree with property taxes.

I also don't see how a person was suppose to foresee the skyrocketing property taxes they'd face once they retired.

Discussion of the matter is academic.

The reality is,.. the country's economic woes are going to force a huge number of retirees to default on their property taxes.

How will the public handle it when old, virtually helpless people are being put out of their paid for homes by the tax man?

Like I said,..it's going to get interesting.

They've got other money than SS. The point is that a lot of folks do not. Also, there are a lot of people who didn't plan to just live on SS, but it happened that way. Nobody at my house is saying anybody ought to have to support them or anything like that. What I am saying and have said for years is that digging a dammed ditch is hard work. I've heard for years on the forums that work such as that just ain't worth x amount of dollars, usually around the time minimum wage rates come up for discussion. I've dug ditches and I've told folks what to do, and believe you me, I'd rather do the latter even if the same pay is involved.

Some doctors have really got their panties bunched up, but look at it this way, the Safari dude already made my case. You take some guy with an average IQ, and he is already effed when it comes to being a doctor. You can figure that most other professions can be commensurate with intelligence too. Not much a person can do about their intellect. If a guy is making $500k per and another guy is making $50k, who is going to hurt worse with a 50% reduction? Who is potentially hurt worse with a 100% reduction and reliance on their savings?

There is also a lot of talk about "self-made men" and other such things. I know a lot of good, intelligent, and even educated folks who are poor. There are other factors outside one's control regardless of what some people's vision of reality is. You won't continue in our way of life if 75% of the people in this country are impoverished. This is regardless of what Ayn Rand's adherents think and also those who say a poor man never gave him a job. True as true and right as rain on that last, but a guy who invents something usually has to have somebody to do the work in making it, unless it is pottery or something.

As Gus would say...ancient Sumaria, now there's a thought...~insert long pull on the bong here~whyn't we go back to them days and whup out the leeches to cure cancer?

That part of very much out of control. Especially, all these county and state wide re-assessments that are way below actual property values.



When that happens it will get real ugly. Like nothing yet seen.

The [bleep]? I thought you were just sayin' the other day as how the youngsters were gonna "Logan's Run" all you elderly persons. That won't help the real estate market what with all them old folks' haciendas on the market and suchlike. It could break some of the companies too. Not as big of a market for Kaopectate and what not.

There are much better reverse mortgage plans than the 50% dynamic you speak of. 3000 combined SS will get you over a couple 100,000 in equity lines of credit. 200K at 5% sets you back a grand a month plus sundries. Also, take in a renter for your food bills. Where there's a will, there's a way.


All far better than going hungry, don't you think? Unless,of course, ya'll are going to starve yourselves to death to prove a point.

Already happened in many places, my man. I had to sell a home in Texas because of exorbitant property taxes. I had part interest after an inheritance and the property taxes were the deal-breaker. They were linked to the "fair market value" too, and had nothing to do with what the other heirs eventually got out of it.

I think the point our leakypond friend is making is that property taxes, even more than other types, are inherently unjust.

Plenty of talk about reducing spending on welfare, foreign aid and healthcare, has anyone thought about pulling the throttle back on this one??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

Unjust is in the eye of the payor and it varies. Where are these we're gonna starve because of real estate taxes places? 1 out of 100,000 homeowners or less ain't a debate winning stat,either!

We both know that B is just overstating for effect. I happen to agree with rrroe though. Real estate and other property taxes are fundamentally unjust. I know you don't like to talk "pie-in-the-sky" but they are. A man pays for something, it should be his and not his only if he can keep paying the government protection money to keep it.

John,

Military spending at the current levels should be temporary. We could fix the military spending within a couple years, but that's not the case for spending on social welfare programs like Medicare and Medicaid that are continuing to rise at an awful rate. The article said that Social Security and Medicare combined represent 1/3 of the U.S. federal government budget. That is not sustainable, and we are going to have to either phase out those programs over time or radically reform them.

And in a word, "yes". The problem is that the libs all want to do this and not that they are always wrong, but they almost always have a hidden agenda in addition to the visible one, which is bad enough. Lots of us have a problem with siding up with liberals even if we think cuts could be made too. We also aren't experts on what is and what isn't needed and its gotten to where anymore, in the US, the ones benefiting will fight until the last dog is dead on a $500 hammer. Nobody wants to see us defenseless.

As long as it's fair and equitable I agree. However, what they're doing to make money at the expense of property owners with property tax hikes via re-assessments is just plain UNJUST! And it's going to pizzz a ton of people off. Especially, those who have no place else to go.

Even worse many do not have the money for the unjust tax hike and when the man comes to evict ...well SHTF round 1 begins.

Further, any of these candidates, regardless of party, who promise the demise of property taxes are just plain liars. Virginia is a prime example. No more car tax my azzzz. I won't vote for them. Not again.

Well,..sure they are.

It's being billed as "entitlement reform".

That's politispeak for, "We've squandered alla that Social Security money you've been paying in all of your life,..so eat fuggin' cake, peon".

I always thought it was unjust that my folks bought my younger brother a mustang convertible while I had to drive the Ford Fairlane. So, I could either continue to beat the schit out of my little brother with some misdirected anger or learn to adjust to the unjust.

When you fight for a living for much of your work week,you really learn to pick those unjust battles that are worth fighting over rather than wasting energy and time spouting worthless musings over matters long ago fought and lost.

I am really pissed about feeding SA Charlie and buying him big screen TVs and XBOX,though.

Will,

I don't want to go to a doctor who makes less than $100k per year because for the amount of training that I expect for my physician, that isn't near enough money to repay school loans, the opportunity cost of his/her time for all of his/her training, and to reimburse him/her for the time and effort he/she spent training. Feel free to take yourself to a physician with less training, but I think the current level of training is about right.

If you want to reduce costs, why don't you just create a health care network where nurses (not nurse practitioners, but RNs) are the only ones you get to see unless they give you a referral. Most nurses are good at diagnosing the common stuff, and a lot of them are great at it. Plus, it would have the added benefit of quickly eliminating from the health care system patients who have something that looked common but turned out to be a little more exotic and deadly. The ones with something a little more exotic would be the most expensive ones to treat too, so it is a winner all the way around for cost reductions if they got sent home with Tamiflu or Cipro and they died a month later. That's the real solution to your way of viewing the mess - allow natural selection to take place a little more aggressively.

I'd feel especially sorry for a new doctor coming out into the field today, or one working 5 years or less, who earns only 100K per year.

Letting something go psychologically because there is just nothing one can do about it is something I know a little about. You can always remember it though and do something about it later if conditions change. Acceptance and defeatism aren't always the same thing. Not to apply that to your particular situation though.

Hell you're probably a lot richer than your little bro now anyway.

I don't know the stats so maybe it will blow back onto me when I pisss into the wind here...Do you really know of any doctors who actually make $100,000 or less? Gosh, from what the safari guy said, doctors are all of high intelligence. What person of higher-than-normal intelligence, not to mention significantly higher-than-normal, is going to go into a field not knowing how much they can expect to make? Who would put up with those kinds of hours and all that schooling, and also the expense of it all, and only figure on making that?

Or Dentists. Can you imagine the equipment costs on top of college loans?

My parents new neighbor is out of Emory and working as an ER trauma surgeon. To your point, she's making 12k a month out of the gate but faced with about $750k in past tuition loans. Now add in mal-practice premiums, (which I assume are out of pocket) and they have little.

The state of Texas has some air quality programs that require what is called 10-Year Best Available Control Technology (BACT), and what that means is for the equipment covered by those programs, industry has to have installed the control technology that would have been considered "Best Available Control Technology" 10 years before for a new plant or a new expansion project at an existing plant. In most cases 10-year BACT is a little less stringent, and it is less costly because it is a mature technology. We may need to go to a similar model in health care.

It would work like this: If you are on government-funded health care (Medicare/Medicaid), you get the standard level of care of 10 to 15 years before. To get more advanced care, you have to purchase a supplement. The health care of 10 to 15 years ago is perfectly good for the vast majority of situations, and it would avoid paying premium costs for the latest technology, which aren't needed in the vast majority of cases.

Drug reform so that drug companies couldn't subsidize the 3rd world drug sales with the exorbitant amount of money we pay for drugs would help, too. I want the drug companies to make profits and have a profit motive that drives innovation, but we shouldn't be paying 3x or more for drugs than other countries do.

============

My wife and I have done a fairly good job of bringing a lot of referrals to our dentist who is new, Asian and a Columbia grad. He's done some nice favors for us in return including frank conversation as to loans and,to your point, what it cost him for all the gadgets that surrounded us in my dental exam room alone. Mind boggling. He's a damn good dentist though and I'm sure he'll do very well by the time all said and done. The dentist next door to him has already left his office practice.

I'm not real worried. I'll get what I need for me and my family to survive.

I try to be honest and forthright, but I am also sneaky, focused, creative and an excellent shot.

You're the kind of person today's employers are looking for.

Don't forget 'humble'.

I just want the question answered is isaac worth more than his little bro?



gonna pizz me off to no end if i've been patronizing the wrong bro!



LPE my azz...fear the bob......f me running


unless of course bob is the rich one!


then strike those previous comments from the record

I don't think so. I had to sign a letter 2 weeks ago promising to refrain from calling my boss a stupid dumbass.

Do you work in the current administration?

No. The Obama administration is a group of wizards compared to the incompetent, inexperienced bozos we have in upper management.

All they are worried about is where they are going to eat supper and where is the nearest Casino.

Hopefully they will die soon.

No, physicians typically make more than $100k/yr now, but some who are in primary care in rural areas might not make much more than that, and I'm sure that some in rural areas make less than $100k/yr. I threw out the $100k number because Penguin (Will) was talking about physicians making too much money, and how becoming a physician should require less training than it does now, and there should be more physicians (more supply vs. demand) so that individual physicians make less money. Basically Penguin's premise is that physicians should be paid like accountants, engineers, and architects - people with just four year or five year degrees, and that you accomplish that lower pay for physicians by opening more medical schools slots (and in the process make medical schools much less selective) and reducing the amount of training required to be a physician.

I personally don't remember ever going to see a physician and thinking that he or she had too much training. On the other hand, on a couple occasions I have had to see physician's assistants instead of M.D.s, and I KNOW that at least one of them was undertrained due to his misdiagnosis, and that misdiagnosis could have resulted in a hospital stay and a possible life-threatening situation for me if I had just taken what he said and not gotten a second opinion from a real physician before the condition got much worse. Yeah, Penguin can feel free to go to a bargain doc from a 3rd rate school in the Caribbean who hasn't even finished a residency, but I prefer to go to a physician who has fully completed his/her training in the current U.S. training regimen.

You guys might want to take a look at this...the guy knows his schitt.

http://www.stansberryresearch.com/pub/reports/end_of_america.html

You have certainly set me straight here, assuming that your info is correct. I am absolutely astounded that anybody would go through what doctors have to, educationally, in order to get $100k per.

Glad we all agree that the medical profession isn't THE cause of the debt trap. Could it be the gov't, perhaps?

O_T;

That won't be the focus because the (R)/red team cheerleaders and the (D)/blue team cheerleaders can't stop cheerleading for "their" team long enough to realize that it's THE GAME that's the problem, and that BOTH TEAMS are responsible for the problem.

It'd require them to admit that THEY got duped/screwed, too, and by their own team just as much as the other.

And, of course, they won't do that; they'd rather distract everyone with their cheers, and concentrate on what this/that player is doing.

I'd like to thank isaac and SACharlie for illustrating those points/facts so abundantly well, though. They made it easy to see why the game will go on, the problem won't get fixed, and we can start figuring out what the end result of THAT will be.

Yes sir, that can will just keep getting kicked along, down the path.

As Huey Long said; 'High popalorum and low popahirum". Same/same and no change. We'll see some token stuff but not much more, I'm betting. But hope springs eternal and maybe a little will get the ball rolling and generate more over time. Then,,,,2012.

George Soros is "concerned" that cuts will brake the economy. How altuistic of that bastid.

There are those who talk the talk and those who walk the walk.

entrepreneur[quote=isaac]I'd feel especially sorry for a new doctor coming out into the field today, or one working 5 years or less, who earns only 100K per year. [/quote

Bob,

Let me help you out here:

http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Degree=Doctor_of_Medicine_(MD)/Salary

Pediatricians really struggle to break 6 figures in a lot of areas. This is the reason so many band together is large groups practices. It reduces the overhead.
Surgeons are doing better, but that is a very specialized field.

Did you know that the liability insurance for OB/GYN's approaches $100k+ per year? Yep. General Surgeons I know pay $6-8K per MONTH! Things like that kill the take home pay. Let's not forget that all those other folks working in the office need salary and benefits too.

For all those who think that increasing the number of MD's would lower prices by increase competition need to realize that Health Care is one are you probably don't want dictated completely by market forces, Here's why:

Being an entrepreneur, you go and build a hospital next to the one in your local town. Stock in and staff it. Reduce your fees for attract people. You get half of the patients from the other hospital, but that is not enough volume to cover the operating expenses of either, so BOTH hospitals go out of business! No your town has none?

Unlike many forms of business, Health Care really can't create additional demand (outside of cosmetics).

Same goes for flooding the world with MD's.

I'm talkin n' walkin! grin.

Hoping here that 'Boner' don't get all choked up and start crying at the critical parts of the debates. Sensitive guy.

How are you helping me out when I already asserted such? The last two primary care physicians I represented in their divorce made under 100K.

Is there another Bob you were addressing?

Ah, now I get it. I effed up and thought we were all talkin' fo' real rather than like, to the occifer. You mean lots of docs struggle to net 100 grand after they deduct all the clinic and real estate, the wife's Benz, their Hummer, their kid's tuition, etc.

I have no problem with docs making lots of money, in fact, I think they deserve it. Even after all the tax deductions, I admit to finding it shocking they can't put more away, especially given the lifestyles of some of them around here in light of the microeconomic climate. I don't want to see it privatized.

OTOH, Will is right in that they were begging to be regulated. The costs are out of hand. Maybe research? I dunno. I know I liked it better when I went to a clinic with one or two guys there rather than a dozen doctors. While the latter is convenient, there are problems beyond the scope of this thread that even an amateur like me could point out.

Glad y'all are still caught up on what the individual players are doing...

Or, perhaps just pontificating on the health of a single tree in the stand... while the whole forest is about to catch fire.

You're effing up speaking of all those so called deductions you believe a doctor is entitled to over the plumber.

100K in the DC Metro area barely earns you middle class status.100K a year wouldn't come anywhere close to Benz,Hummer,private school lifestyle,especially withall your other living expenses. You're talking 8-9 gross a month,my man.

You forgot to mention those non-payments from patients that they 'receive', Cole. More deductions. Also add in the costs of the collection agencies. Another deduction for them.

Besides being at the bottom of the physician pay scale, pediatricians get to be on call so they can be awakened at 2:30 or 3:00 in the middle of the night when a baby/child gets sick. The frequency of their call nights depends on the size of their group, but if one is in practice by him/herself, which would be common in smaller towns that have a pediatrician, he/she is on call EVERY night. It is a similar situation for primary care physicians, particularly in rural areas. All that training (and debt) to make less than $100k/yr, and I don't know many people who are going to say their kid's doctor has too much training. There are a lot easier ways to make that kind of money for someone with the brainpower, drive, and determination needed to make it through medical school.

From what I understand, banks throw loan applications at physicians, with the banks looking at the docs' future earnings to pay back the debt (and they know physicians are typically already familiar with high debt levels because they have a ton of school debt). When you see physicians driving expensive cars and living in expensive houses, particularly physicians under 40 (or even 50) years old, you can safely bet most of them are up to their eyeballs in debt beyond just their school loans. I live near the largest medical center in the world (in Houston), and a lot of people would be surprised at how many physicians drive cars that are less expensive than theirs are. Most physicians have an upper middle class lifestyle (not rich), and the ones that live within their current means often drive very middle-class cars.

Personally, I never said it was. Are we twisting things now or discussing them? The medical profession as a whole certainly is a big cause of a lot of personal SHTF's economically for people. IME, if you make quite a bit of money, let's say 100k, you can buy all sorts of insurance. OR if you are making that and socking it away, a medical crisis may be expensive, but it doesn't bankrupt you. People making half that are a whole different story. They usually can't afford all sorts of insurance, leaving them with all these copays and deductibles, not to mention stuff the insurance doesn't cover that was hidden in the fine print. Maybe the insurance companies are to blame? From what I've seen from a decidedly amateurish vantage point, the medical and insurance industries play good cop/bad cop and blame each other. Whatever it is, it's a mess and is certainly contributing significantly to the problems we are experiencing. Certainly on an individual level, big problems are there.

As to blaming the government, you might as well blame you and me. Or you can take the conspiratorial viewpoint that it is owned. Either way, we are to blame because ultimately, we have the power to turn all this around if we want to.

I'll go out on a limb and say I lean towards the Conspiratorial overall. This is because anytime a leader arises amongst the people they don't even have to be killed or some such. They can be defamed. If their own vices can't be used against them, some can be placed before them and if they don't go for it, manufactured. Generally, leaders don't get very far because the whole system is geared towards the path of least resistance and taking the best and brightest and making it easy for them to follow a predetermined path as opposed to making their own. There are a lot of positives in this, but the few negatives are very, very bad. Without even going into deliberate sabotage of our nation, a big negative is boxed-in thinking, which is why the buzz-term "think outside the box" was so big and valued for awhile. The trait still is, although the description is a laughingstock from overuse.

While human beings are plenty fallible, our country was just too rich for things to be this bad by accident. I don't think the big boys, for the most part, are intentionally killing the host, I think they are just too true to their own natures, which can basically be described as "greedy". There may be some who are pursuing this path purposefully to the end of world domination, but mainly it is just greed. That doesn't rule out various conspiracies that I spoke of earlier though. I just tend to see most on a lower level than some grand one, which, if it exists, is mainly served by the lower level ones.

So, is this tree that's getting all the attention healthy or not? Is it an oak, what species is it again?

And, what's that smell? Could it be... smoke?

Anyway, enough of that.... back to the single tree again...

Naw counselor, you've already stipulated that the tax system needs overhauled. lol Don't give me that plumber crap, they make too much too... Besides that, the bastages were supposed to be here a month ago and ain't showed up yet.

I have said twice that I was shocked they made so little. $100k around here is big money, but not that big. I would expect the DC area to be on a higher level.

I begrudge neither a Plumber nor a Physician their earnings. I would just like to see ditch-diggers that aren't in the country illegally, making decent money too. We can talk all day about what is worth what, but if you work hard, you should be able to support yourself and your family in a decent manner and if you go above and beyond, you should be compensated. Doctors do that and to an extent, Plumbers do too.

In the end, our country will not remain the same if the low level people can't make it, just as assuredly as if we tax the wealthy to the point that they can't do business here. I personally think both ends are eating the middle and when they reach each other...the SHIXT WILL HIT THE FAN!!!!!!! Or not...I dunno.

If you wanna be a player, you got to get in the game. Once you're in, you'll understand that many things are much more difficult than it would appear. To wit: In order to fix the overall issue, you have to first tackle all the sub issues that are impacting it. Identify the problem. We spend more than we earn. How to fix it? You either quit spending so much or somehow figure out how to earn more. There are a lot of little issues within that context that must be addressed.

If you are of the Bristoe mindset that it is beyond repair then you can opt out of the whole situation and prepare for a collapse. If enough people have this mindset, it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. SHTF is always a good bet, because it will happen, if not now, then sometime. The bad bet is when. Problem is, there is nobody that just wants to bet on it happening, everybody needs to know when. And there it is.

You're right. I don't think a lot is going to be done about Social Security, except possibly to phase it out over 30 years or so, but Medicare and Medicaid expenses are the issue. I will reference an earlier post I made about how treatments using the latest drugs, procedures, and equipment are typically much more expensive than mature technologies are - drugs that are out of patent, procedures so well established that residents commonly do them, and equipment with technology that is mature. We have to realize that as a nation we cannot afford to pay for gold-plated medical care for everyone. I realize that under that model some treatments might not be accessible to me as a middle-class American, but we have to do something so that we can reduce the costs. There has to be some mechanism to ration care, and I think the most palatable one would be to say the standard treatment 10 years ago was this, that's what Medicare/Medicaid will pay for, and that's what you get unless you can pay for it out of pocket. That would still provide excellent care, but would reduce costs.

Additionally, research has found that when people are actually writing a check or paying with plastic rather than just signing something for an insurance company to pay, they are much more conscious of their medical cost and typically better stewards of money going to medical payments. That concept needs to be implemented in government-paid medicine just like some companies are implementing (e.g., high deductible insurance plans).

Funny, I don't see any players; just a lot of fans/cheerleaders.

Funny, I don't see any players; just a lot of fans/cheerleaders.
========================

What a coincidence. I was just thinking the exact same thing!

Glad you took a look down and saw those pom-poms in your hands. Finally...

Oops, I guess I misread the original intent. Happens when your eyes aren't completely open in the morning. Maybe I should rethink this no coffee thing?

"We have to realize that as a nation we cannot afford to pay for gold-plated medical care for everyone."

Very wise statement. I also believe that the country cannot afford to provide at least basic preventative healthcare to the masses.

The way it is now people without health insurance won't go to a doctor until there's a serious problem and when they show up at an emergency room where costs skyrocket they won't be denied services. Then we're footing the bill for expensive procedures that might have been avoided by a visit to a clinic or doctor's office.

With that said I'm gonna step waist deep in the schithole.

We already have a very very poor form of socialized healthcare. The uninsured can't recieve preventative healthcare but once there's a problem - no problem - it's free.

----------

Hey Cole,

I think I just bought the lotto ticket.

"No coffee thing?"

There was no thinking involved there at all...

Yeah, I bought one one time....

1. Not twisting anything, just stating the obvious, to me anyhow.

2. (bold) Surely you fuggin jest??

Just for grins, the avg working stiff pays ~ 65% of income towards taxes (all taxes) and insurance. I need to find the source for that but read it, figured my own as a small business man and was d*mned close, the difference being I can deduct much (a buttload, actually) whereas the w-2 gang can't. The w-2 folks are the puckees here. But then again, only 50% of all of us pay any taxes at all.

Might be right on that one......

No "might" about it.

Yeeeaaahh, I was just funnin'...

Ya got me!!!!

I think you meant to write we need to provide basic preventative care, and I would agree to an extent. Perhaps one way would be to mandate that if you want emergency room care and you don't have insurance, you have to have had a wellness check-up within the past two years. Medicaid could pay for those check-ups for those in poverty and a tax deduction (separate from the current medical deduction category) available to everyone else. If you had well-trained nurses (or medical residents) doing the wellness check-ups, the cost would be small (I would guess less than $50 each), and the dividends should far exceed the cost.

However, one big problem is still that people don't take care of themselves, and the government can't do anything about that (or at least we don't want the government that involved in our lives). You can see that in the skyrocketing levels of obesity in this country, and only a small fraction of the obesity cases result from an underlying medical problem, so the vast majority of medical problems caused by obesity are caused by choices the patient made. Ditto for smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, drug abuse, lack of exercise and food abuse (poor eating habits). We need to make people responsible for themselves if we are going to contain medical costs, and even preventative care isn't going to help much for people who won't take care of themselves.

==============

You needed to have them taken away from you. In 2012,when it comes time for another 100 million vote casts between the only two viable GOP and Dem candidates,you can keep hitting us with your barrage of what everyone already knows and continue to confuse the difference between apples and oranges.

If it all isn't moving fast enough for you,well...that's pretty much a tough schit dynamic for you,isn't it? You spit in one hand while demanding that 500 billion be cut immediately in your other and report back to me what your hand looks like at the end of the day. In the meanwhile,many of us have to deal with the realities.

Do tell me more about the budget crisis,though. The 4 newspapers I read each day and the daily news just don't seem to want to address it.

Getting pissy, quick...

You want to deal with "realities"? How about trading yours for a few other "realities" for a few weeks, and see what hits you squarely then?

You want to take a look at the actual NUMBERs and not the spin, and get back to me on what the actual facts say?

You want to admit that BOTH parties got us up to our eyes in this schit, and NEITHER party has the proposals floated, nor the intention to do so, to get us out?

Both parties + the Independent Party.

Pissed towards someone's obnoxiousness is more like it. If I traded mine for someone elses,that wouldn't be reality,would it?

The blame game is easy and for the "talkers". Solving the problem is the task at hand and what the "walkers" engage in. Tell us how to solve the problem again,if you will. You have to promise to do so inside today's realities and not those of the man sitting on top of a mountain day-dreaming his way to a solution.

I blame my clients who bounce a 8500 check on me. Somehow though,that blaming doesn't appear in the deposit column.

I anxiously await your realistic and doable solution! I think guys like Rand Paul are anxious to hear your doable solution,as well.

Saw a blurb where by 2020, = 40% of the U.S. population will have diabetes, figured from the present rate projected outward.

Why are so many welfare recipients fat? Thank goodness for spandex.

You can't make people take care of themselves. And when their health takes a nose dive, they're screaming for the next guy's kidney, and no holds barred top medical care. When they're all fixed up, they're back to their old habits, and will kick your a** if you question them on it. I see it every day.

Have seen same.

Have seen no "walkers" trying to solve any problem at hand; just more "talkers" blaming the other team, and making token gestures to appease their own fans.

You want to know what would work?

Cap spending at current revenue levels, now. No more borrowing.

Flat 15% federal tax on all income (ALL income) at all levels, now.

No deductions, on personal, corporate, or any other income.

Appraisal and full revenue/expense audit of all federal programs; with abolition of any that are repetitive, redundant, or overlap.

Lifting regulatory restrictions on petroleum exploration/refining, and nuclear programs in the U.S., now.

Appraisal and full revenue/expense audit of any/all federally held lands, with sale of those that are unprofitable by bid. All revenue going to elimination of debt.

Phasing out of Medicare/Medicaid, and Social Security over the next 30 years.

Once the debt is paid off, then any budget line increases or tax reductions could be contemplated.

That'd work.

Oh, wait... you wanted realistic?

Realistically, neither party will do one damned thing except make gestures to their fans, get the applause for "their team" and "boos" for the other, while the country goes deeper into debt and insolvency. That's the realism of the situation.

"Realistically, neither party will do one damned thing except make gestures to their fans, get the applause for "their team" and "boos" for the other, while the country goes deeper into debt and insolvency. That's the realism of the situation."

Sadly, you're right.

My FOX alert just stated both the GOP and Dem versions of budget cuts were voted down today. Troubling though,is the fact 3 GOP voted down the GOP 61B version. Don't know who the three are though.

If not for the fiscal rationalism of the American people, which gave birth to the Tea Party movement, the scenarios being talked about on this thread might come true. With growing political support to balance the federal budget its growing more and more likely that congress will address entitlements.

As many here know, Paul Ryan has a detailed plan for fixing entitlements in a way that doesn't screw people who have paid into the system all their working lives. That's important because it makes Ryan's plan politically doable if Republicans take control of congress and win the Presidency in 2012.

One of the things the American people have to come to grips with is that healthcare is not a basic human right. Medicare is going to have to be limited in what it provides and also means tested. Simply stated, people with money are going to be able to buy advanced healthcare that's not available to the poor and poor people are going to die because of the lack of advanced healthcare. If the American people won't accept that premise then the government's only viable option is to withhold approval of expensive drugs and procedures so that the rich can't buy a few more years or months of suffering for themselves.

The U.S. economy can carry a 14 trillion dollar debt if the Federal budget is balanced, and with a balance budget the economy will grow at a rate that allows the debt to be paid down. To bet otherwise is to bet against the American people's fundamental wisdom.

Very good post.

Good points, and it doesn't matter as much that the debt get paid down as it matters that we can continue to refinance it as needed and can make the interest payments without harming the economy or the government's ability to do the things it has to and needs to. A quick calculation shows that $14 trillion in debt today would be the current equivalent of $5.2 trillion 50 years from now at a 2 percent inflation rate. In 100 years, that same $14 trillion would be the current equivalent of $1.9 trillion at 2 percent inflation rate. We just need to quit adding to the debt, and soon. I've long held that we just need to keep our deficits down (preferably to zero or close to zero) and wait for time to be our friend in reducing the debt through inflation.

Does anyone have the time to check to see who were the 3 GOP Senators who voted against the GOP Budget cutting bill today?

Please post if you know or find out.

Thank you.

Nothing on Fox Bob, but I did find this on the Huffpo.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/09/senate-rejects-house-gop-budget_n_833700.html

JFC......

After my free advice which is worth about what you had to pay for it.
NeBassman quite reasonably asked a fair question:

�How?
My recollection is that tax rates were relatively high during the 1950's during the Eisenhower era. If that is the fix it aint gonna happen, neither party has the political will to raise tax rates. (or make significant cuts in spending.)�

So:
Let me add some numbers to my point about the importance of debt percent of GDP/GNP.

I said that the percentage dropped from 122% of GDP in 1946 to 32% in 1974.
However, the Federal Debt increased from 222 billion in 1946 to 1500 billion in 1974.

Much of that increase was due to inflation as much as overspending.
Today it is mostly overspending, but inflation is rearing its ugly head and that could blow the doors off the old �46 record percentage.

My point is that the 1500 billion debt in �74 was a smaller problem than the 222 billion debt was in �46 because GDP increased faster than the debt.

If I go out and buy a Ferrari, I�m in deep dodo.
So I keep my Civic or increase my income��increase my personal GDP a lot!

Our GNP is about 3 times that of China.
That is one leg on this 3 legged stool that the Doomsday Sayers conveniently ignore.
Cut spending and balance the budget to help get things rolling again and will go a long ways.
But not if we cut to the point that we go into a depression.
Growth and jobs, jobs, jobs, is the biggest leg on my funny looking stool.

Higher taxes is exactly the wrong thing to do.
That is a job killer��a revenue killer in the long run.

In the 70�s we grew our way out despite the high tax rates of the Eisenhower years.
The big jumps came when we cut taxes and revenue increased.
Kennedy�s tax cuts was the first time I saw that happen.

This time we must remember lessons learned and cut spending as well as let off the brakes.
In the past we did not do that and it always came back to bite us in the ass.
If we don�t do both and do it soon�China�s GNP will become about 3 times that of ours.

This time I hope they start now with spending cuts, even if they don�t make pass the Senate and WH, and make permanent the Bush tax cuts.
Last month�s extension of the Bush tax cuts did provide a tiny drop in unemployment.
Make them permanent would provide a bigger increase in jobs.

Then in 2013, get serious and make some real spending cuts and real tax cuts.
Smart spending cuts that will not push us into a 1930�s depression.
Smart tax cuts that mean more jobs, Jobs, JOBS.

Making hard times harder won�t fix anything.
A depression is the last thing we need to reduce debt.
It sure didn�t reduce debt in the 1930�s.

I know of only one time, one place, one government entity that cut spending while running a revenue surplus.

Alaska in 2008.

I�m hoping that the Tea Party House with the future Tea Party Senate and Tea Party WH can do the same.

Despite all these posts, the debt is still increasing.

And Buddy Moore just farted. He ate butter beans tonight.

Dayumm on both counts.

I�m thinking that by 2012 we will know who the keepers are and who needs to have their heads pinched off.


Schit, we know that now.

Did your Whitetail Coalition form a Union yet? You know the name really does imply the big U. Probably used my $35 to start-up.....errrrr!

Report: Pimco�s Gross Sells All US Treasury Holdings
Wednesday, 09 Mar 2011 01:36 PM

By Dan Weil

Pimco�s star bond manager Bill Gross has offered a bearish view on Treasurys in his latest market commentary and remarks to the media. And according to a report on ZeroHedge.com, he acted on this bearishness in January, selling all of the Treasury holdings in Pimco�s Total Return Fund, the world�s largest mutual fund.

Pimco officials weren�t immediately available for comment. Zero Hedge didn�t say how it got the figures for holdings as of February.

�Based on still to be publicly reported data �, the world's largest bond fund, in the month of January, has taken its (U.S. government) bond holdings to zero,� the ZeroHedge report states.

�The offset, not surprisingly, is cash. After sporting $28.6 billion in �government related� securities, TRF (Total Return Fund) dropped to $0, while its cash holdings surged from $11.9 billion to a whopping $54.5 billion, based on total TRF holdings of $236.9 billion as of February 28.�

That represents the fund�s highest cash total ever and its first zero position in Treasurys since January 2009, according to ZeroHedge. It says Pimco�s Treasury holdings peaked in June 2010 at $147.4 billion and have dropped steadily afterward. Gross had cut the holdings to 12 percent of assets in January, according to the Newport Beach, Calif.-based company�s website.

That decline means Gross �is now convinced there will be no QE3 at all, at least based on his just putting his money where his monthly pen is!� the report states.

�And if Bill Gross, the most connected person to the upcoming actions by the Fed, believes there is no more quantitative easing, it is really time to get the hell out of dodge in all security classes � bonds, and most certainly, equities.�

As for Gross� own words, Treasurys represent �the most overvalued area of the bond market,� he recently told Yahoo�s Tech Ticker. The reasons for that are the 0.25 percent federal-funds rate that the Fed has kept in place for more than two years and its open-market purchases of Treasurys under quantitative easing that have run at an annual rate of $1.5 trillion.

In his March commentary, Gross asks who will buy Treasurys when the Fed ends its purchases under QE2, now scheduled for June.

Foreign countries with excess currency reserves, like China, will continue their $500 billion of annual purchases, he says. Aside from them, he�s not sure. But, �Someone will buy them, and we at Pimco may even be among them,� Gross says.

�The question really is at what yield and what are the price repercussions if the adjustments are significant.� And Gross says Treasury yields could be set to surge.

�What I would point out is that Treasury yields are perhaps 150 basis points too low when viewed on a historical context and when compared with expected nominal GDP growth of 5 percent.� (One basis point is equivalent to 0.01 percent, or one-hundredth of a percentage point.)

That�s especially true given that the amount of outstanding Treasurys held by private investors totals only 40 percent, and the amount held by the Fed and foreign governments is sharply rising, he says.

"It becomes a question of musical chairs to a certain extent: who gets out first and who's the last one looking for a chair on June 30," when QE2 ends, Gross tells Yahoo.

Pimco�s U.S. government-related debt category can include conventional and inflation-linked Treasurys, agency debt, interest-rate derivatives, Treasury futures and options and bank debt backed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., according to the company�s website.

Read more: Report: Pimco�s Gross Sells All US Treasury Holdings

I dreamed of killing you again last night. Nothing beats waking up in the morning in a good mood.

Please do not confuse me with your company's management. PLEASE!

The only way to remedy the federal debt problem is to deny social security, medicare/medicaid to the entire boomer generation.

Ain't gonna happen, of course, until after the crash.

The government will work to protect itself and its elite benefactors and let the people scratch for the crumbs afterwards.

End game is going to be very rough.

What was wrong with the way we did it in 1946 to 1974 as I just outlined?

We started out 122% in the hole, worse than now, and fixed it without any crash.

And please be specific.

Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid for the boomer generation over the next 2 decades totals 50 to 80 trillion dollars. (measured in todays dollars,..which will undoubtedly be dropping in value as time progresses, consequently increasing the estimate)

That's plenty all by itself to cause a complete monetary collapse,..and it doesn't include the additional trillions of dollars that would typically be spent on the military and interest on the national debt.

That's it,..that's all.

There's really no reason to complicate the situation beyond that basic fact.

What you ain't gettin' is that lots of folks hereabouts, want a crash.

who?

You, among others. You didna really need to ask, now did you.

You're equally inept at both arithmetic and psychology.

Just because you believe something doesn't make it correct. The only thing holding this country back from its former greatness is its collective mind. You and I can predict all we want, but even the greatest mathematician or psychologist in the world doesn't know.

You give the definite impression of hoping something will happen. Only God knows whether that impression is accurate. Such hopes are common amongst the elderly and infirm. It's a time of life type thing.

You give the definite impression of being scared to acknowledge the inevitable.

You're as bad as those who won't acknowledge the possible. You also give the impression of being scared that it won't happen.

There's a lot of stuff I'm scairt of.

One possible scenario that you fail to mention is a million little SHTF's as the government, regardless of what you think, grows ever stronger and corporatism/communism becomes ever more commonplace. Radical measures taken by radical people with only peonlike jobs left but nobody willing to take up arms to combat both the theft of liberty and treasure. Much of it has already happened.

To say you are clueless or don't get it doesn't even begin to address your problem.

Sorry for the language many would find offensive. Thinking about it rather than formulating a smart comeback would probably be inconducive to the witty reparte' on the board here, but it might be the better thing. YMMV.

I think I'd prefer to be clueless. Unfortunately, a couple of decades worth of observing the downward slide of our society, both monetarily and socially, has imbued within me the equivilent of numerous red pills.

It's far too late for me to awaken in my bed tomorrow believing whatever I choose to believe.

I believe what I witness.

It can be a burden.

Well...

I think I'd prefer to be clueless.
=================

Well,as luck would have it!

hahahahaaa

I don't think so. I think they would MUCH prefer sound government in accordance with the Constitution. They correctly perceive, however, the natural consequences of disregarding sound government in accordance with the Constitution.

+1

#1 Even though the marginal income tax burden was higher then, the overall tax/fee burden is MUCH higher today.

#2 We weren't facing ongoing expenditures then that would continue to drive us deeper into debt (SS & Medicare).

#3 We weren't facing the bankruptcy and presumed bailing out of not only multiple cities and small Gov't entities, but of entire states such as California.

The Fed Gov alone spends $0.40 of borrowed money for every dollar it spends. What do you think this figure would be when you include states, counties & cities?
Remember, that borrowing belongs to all of us. Now that we have gotten use to living on a credit card for ~ 50% of our expenses, what do you think it will be like when we have to cut that 50% out?

Have you ever cut your household budget by 50%? What was that like? Think about it.

Saying we can inflate our way out of it leaves no room for error. What happens if a large natural disaster strikes or we are engaged in another major war?

You'll have to beat the Democrats first!

(And the Repubs who "don't want to look bad".)

Any single gov't can inflate their way out of it. It's just that the whole world can't do it simultaneously. Can't export inflation back and forth to each other as is being done now.

BOWSINGR;

The differences between now and then are thus:

Then, we were THE producer nation on the planet. Post-WWII, if it was being made, it was being made by us. Today, we make nearly nothing, but we consume from everywhere else. Hard to build an economy on that...

Also, much of that growth was due to the massive expansion of .gov. Want more of that? How much more can we take.

We were in an arms/space race with Russia, and that spending fueled a boom, as did the burgeoning population from the birth of the "boomers" to the housing, building boom. We don't have that now.

At that time, we did not have a looming, massive, imminent entitlement burden such as do now.

And, we'd become/solidified our position as being the world's reserve currency nation, working hard to further that end, instead of now being set to lose that status and working toward THAT end.

Simply put, the economic factors were all aligned perfectly then for a recovery such as we saw through a boom. Now, they are aligned opposite to that end.

My grandfather's generation weathered the Depression, and won the World War. They built this nation out of it's debt, and secured the entitlement programs for their children, "the boomers". Unfortunately, they overspoiled "the boomers", and that "entitlement" mindset hold in them deeply.

When they had my generation, the entitlement mindset was passed on, and the immediate conflict between two "entitled" generations was quickly evident, to the point that many of my generation just don't GAF.

All of which has set the table for this situation, and for the royal f'king of my daughter's generation.

Facts are facts, math is math, and the numbers don't lie, regardless of whether politicians, party-loyalists, or much the population wants to see/acknowledge them as such.

I don't think you get it VA. I know a lot more of the WWII generation better than you do. I was born to two. Social Security was that generation's NAFTA. Not many of them that I'm aware of wanted it. Yet most tried to do the best they could within the framework they had to work with. Most of them said that SS would never be around by the time I retired and to not depend on it. At the same time, many people get stuck in jobs and try to progress, yet can't. Sometimes they are folks who just don't have the talent, but many times it is due to no fault of their own but rather the butt-kissing system that is in place which rewards toadying over performance. SS reliance as a main source of retirement income to these folks is not a choice, it is just what it is. Most boomers never figured that SS would last either.

Another thing you aren't thinking about is the longer lifespan. This has created a system where old folks were in power a lot longer than in previous generations. Old folks think differently than young ones. Many in the Boomer generation have never had anything to do with anything other than their vote. Now that some are in power, they are just as old as those who finally either croaked or became so senile that they could no longer function. Look at Strom Thurmond.

Blame it all on the Boomers if you wish, but that blame is misplaced.

Another area you are overlooking in this case is immigration. I am old enough to remember the constant harping of scientists and government officials on population control. The whites in this country took it to heart and if you look at the demographics of the population increase that will eventually break Social Security and the other entitlements, you will find that it ain't due to "Americans" increasing their population. It is almost entirely due to immigrants and or minorities. These are also the folks who demand things much more than the traditional definition of the "Boomer" generation that you are using.

In the end it isn't one generation or another who is to blame. It is the politicians, corporatists and others who have sold us out for their own ends. Combine this with voters and entitlement folk who are too dumb to elect decent people to run things, and there you have it. Throw in a few conspiracies for good measure.

If you're talking to me, I'm not the one that was arguing they can't. I'm just a dumb farmer. I know about cows and dirt and suchlike.

You are both right in your own context.

The answer is default...the Gov has no plans on ever repaying it's debt, never have. It will be yet another US Gov default (yes I am correct).

Before I get flamed into oblivion, there are multiple types of default, designed to fool the sheeple.

The current method of choice is a controlled devalutaion of the dollar.

That is one form of default....

The only ones who don't realize what is really going on is the American public, AKA sheeple.

Doubt me....PIMCO now has ZERO Gov. debt in it's largest, flagship bond fund.

Get a clue fellas, it is happening right under your noses.

Tony

There will be a worldwide, generally agreed upon, 'soft default by all debtor, G-20 nations.

You've watched "Taxi Driver" too many times, Cole. grin.

Yes, you are correct, hence the answer to the question....

Will there be QExxxx to infinity ?

Tony

Yes but under a different name in different nations.

The DeNiro quote was, "You talkin' to me?"

I don't see anybody else here!

We are gonna hear some tremors out of the EU from their mtg. tomorrow.
Especially with the most recent downgrade of Spain. Some markets are gonna shake and I'm betting we'll feel it.

Hard to say. The markets are beginning to wake up to the possibility that there will not be. I still say the economy is too weak to stand on its own, mainly because the problem (overindebted citizens and Trillions USD in bad debt on the balance sheets of all the major banks and the Federal Reserve) has never been dealt with. I think we are about at the end of the line for what supply side steroids can do for the economy.

Next? Some attention to the demand side is needed. And won't the political fireworks fly when/if that happens?

The cure to this problem is going to necessitate a change in attitude. This is not a right/left or conservative/liberal issue it is, rather, a production versus rentier one. And to accept this requires a slicing and dicing of political alliances. It will require a complete rethink of tax and trade policy. I'm not sure we will get there without doing everything else under the sun first.

One thing I am sure of: the Republican cure for this problem will cause that depression that we thought we dodged a couple years ago.

Don't get me wrong, as I've said before there are worse things than a depression. A currency crisis among them. The biggest problem with the Republican cure is that it ignores the problems that caused this mess and instead attempts to deal with the symptoms that were made worse by it. Putting all the pain off on those who rely on SS or Medicare will not work politically. I am still convinced that Americans will accept pain and do what is right but only if they think that the pain is being distributed equally.

You cannot have one class of people living large off of government guarantees and Federal Reserve largesse and expect the rest of the country to suck it up. The pain has to be spread out or you will get a political explosion. I told you after Obama was elected that the Democrats misread the implications of their imaginary mandate. I am telling you right now that the Republicans are doing the same thing.

The real mandate was for even handedness, sobriety, a self sufficient America where decent jobs could be found. Not for one sided pain dealt out to those who don't have the political firepower to resist.

There will be many here who tell you I am full of it and am showing my populist side. Sobeit. Most of them are the same ones who told you that the economy was doing great when a handful of us tried to warn you what was coming. Who you gonna believe?

Will

Cutting the entire Federal discretionary budget will not solve the problem (and it is a real problem). The things that must be cut severely are the Defense budget (the US accounts for 48% of the entire world�s military spending � let�s let the French, Brits, Germans and Chinese pick up their military spending) and, the welfare (entitlement) programs like Social Security and Medicare. If we cut these heavily, plus a measure of the discretionary budget, we can make progress.

Social Security and Medicare are the second two largest welfare programs going. Perhaps the largest is the defense budget, buying $9 billion aircraft carriers, $3 billion submarines, etc. with minimum justification (other than we need them). When I was at the DOD, I spent 50 hours a week dreaming up justifications for new systems (principally electronic) - we often wondered why we just could not be honest and slow the spending down. The Defense welfare programs employ a lot of people who vote and that is one major reason that defense contractors spread production facilities in as many states and possible.

If we are really serious about the debt, we need to attack the largest items in the budget and they are Defense, social Security and Medicare.

I never said �inflate� I said �grow�

+1

Perhaps the defense budget is not the �largest welfare programs going.�

United States Military Spending as percent of GNP

2011StrategyWorld.com
May 12, 2009:
Leadership Article


With the U.S. defense budget accounting for over half the military spending on the planet, you'd think that records were being broken. Well, they aren't. As a percentage of GNP, U.S. military spending continues a decline that has been going on since the 1960s (when, because of the Vietnam war, defense spending was 10.7 percent of GNP). That went down to 5.9 percent of GNP in the 1970s and, despite a much heralded "defense buildup" in the 1980s, still declined in the 1980s (to 5.8 percent.) With the end of the Cold War, spending dropped sharply again in the 1990s, to 4.1 percent. For the first decade of the 21st century, defense spending is expected to average 3.4 percent of GNP. Most of the current defense budget is being spent on personnel (payroll and benefits), and buying new equipment to replace the Cold War era stuff that is wearing out and to pay for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
U.S. procurement needs are heavier than usual now because, during the 1990s, procurement was cut to about 15 percent of the defense budget, instead of the usual 25 percent. This was to be part of the post-Cold War "peace dividend." But then September 11, 2001 came along and the peace ended. Since then, U.S. defense spending has increased about 60 percent. Not only that, but the remaining post-Cold War forces would have to get their decrepit gear replaced anyway, and now that is being done, although with a smaller (than during the Cold War) armed forces.
Another reason the defense spending, as a percentage of GNP, keeps going down, is because the economy keeps growing at a fast rate. Since 1991, global GDP has more than doubled, while defense spending has increased by about 34 percent. Americans, like the rest of the world, are spending more money on more things, but less of it on defense.

I believe what you are saying here 100%.

That makes two of us. We have a ways to go convincing the rest of the country. lol

Will

Cole;

I don't disagree with a thing you posted in reply to me.

Mark my words...sometime in late summer, QE3 will appear. The foundation and justification is being laid now.

There is no other option.

Tony

Will;

I agree with your premise. I disagree that politically any of those "good" solutions will happen. Which leaves..... what....?

www.bloomberg.com

"FED gives clue to mkts of exit from QE".

HAH! Yeah, right.

I forsee a period of high inflation to pay back the debt with inflated dollars in leu of higher taxes. I also see the retirement age for Social Security being raised up to 70 for kids 10 or 20 years old or younger, with a gradual phasing in a year for every 10 years back.

I'd give up SS right now if they told me I no longer had to pay towards it. Make that deal with about 50 million folks. I'm educatingly guessing the savings could be rather significant.

Same here! Without hesitation.

When Social Security was instituted in the 1930's, the average worker retired at 65 and lived to 72 or so; their draw-down from Social Security was for 7-8 years, on average. Today, many retire at 55 (cops are mandated to retire at 57) and living into the mid-80's is common - thus the draw-down years are much longer, often 40 or more years; all the while, collecting more than they put in.

The only ways to resolve this is for (1) workers to work longer (perhaps 'til 70 or longer, (2) encourage them to die sooner (fewer years draw-down) or (3) raise the contribution rate even higher. Perhaps Option 1 is the better route.

Isaac and byc;

Absolutely. I'd be in like Flynn on that deal.

Would those potential cuts be substantial,Sean?

At my age I aready have contributed over 3/4 of my working career, so it would not be beneficial at this point.

12-15 more years of paying,though?? You sure about that,Cheyenne?

Long-term, yes, those cuts would be substantial.

However, immediate substantial cuts are also needed.

Yes.

I'm sure. Based on the funny papers the Social Security Administration sends out every 2 years, it would only take me about 6 years to recover the extra money I could sock away by not paying it for 12 years. If I could get back all contributions already made, that would change the math considerably. But, if the funny papers are correct, even that may not result in an advantage over the long haul, depending on rate of return versus life expectancy. Of course, they're just funny papers.

Everybody needs to take a hit. What will aggravate me, though, is if the people who deferred gratification in the hope of a comfortable retirement take a disproportionate hit compared to those who did not.

The hit needs to go to those who never contributed in the 1st place.

I think you see all too clearly.

Bet on it

I am assuming that will be the case. My life goal at this point is to stay healthy, because it will be the medical costs that sink us all. They will means test people so they spend all their assets while the broke people walk into the ER for free like they do now.

I always said you were highly intelligent.

Always works that way, at least since banking took over our national government in 1913. For example, business concerns with a good business model didn't need any help when the recession hit, while those with a bad business model needed help. The result? The good businesses had to pay to bail out the bad businesses via the tax code, i.e., good business model was punished and bad business model was rewarded with money taken from the good businesses.

Trouble is you ain't talking about that post on this thread but that other one where I was saying, "VA is smart, works hard...women want him, men want to be him and he has cool guns."

In times like these, a man has to take his entertainment where he finds it.

Lately, I've been making it a point to piss of Generation X whenever possible.

They're getting *all* stirred up here lately. Listen to this one.

http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/03/mailvox-rage-of-entitled-elderly.html

And guess how it will be done? By ending all the debt-funded payments to the entitled elderly like Juddsnell, Mommy, and Daddy, who are responsible for digging this massive hole. It wasn't the Grasshopper Generation that created the prescription drug entitlement during the Bush administration after all. The Baby Boomers may not have created the original problem, but they not only didn't try to fix it, they blatantly exacerbated it. But Social Security is going to end, Medicare is going to end, and Medicaid are going to end, and they're all going to shut down faster than anyone imagines at present.

And then, instead of decrying the younger generations for daring to spend money they don't have on themselves, Juddsnell will be castigating them for refusing to spend it on his useless, wrinkled ass. And the vibrant peoples who were imported as substitutes for the missing millions of Generations X and Y aren't going to argue with us and insist that they be taxed more to keep elderly gringos alive.