Originally Posted by kotomile
Agree that the extreme ends of the spectrum are both bad. But can you at least elaborate?
Both parties are STATIST. That is, they believe that the individual needs to be subservient to the gov't instead of vice versa. That the gov't is the arbiter and shaper of society. That gov't needs more and more power to "do the right thing".
The 2 parties only differ in what flavor of Statism they openly push.
In reality the both support the other side.
For example. The Republicans believe in Empire and the War Machine. These are threats to liberty at home. By definition that requires big gov't. They merely pretend to be for smaller gov't and against huge entitlements. Case in point - the Medicare Prescription Drug Act of 2005 was spearheaded by the Republicans. And in one fell swoop it was the largest single increase in the gov't's unfunded liabilities, by something like 10%. You don't see the media explaining this.
The Democrats believe in Socialsim aka Welfarism and wealth re-distribution. They believe in "good gov't" micro-managing our lives a la Sweden. They *pretend* to be pro civil liberties. Case in point: Obama the supposed Constitutional scholar supports the doublespeak-named Patriot Act. And the Democrats pretend to be anti war, yet voted to support all the wars, and never even asserted the constitutional requirement that Congress vote on all acts of war.
But never fear. The Federal Gov't will go insolvent. It's not a question of if. It's hardly even a question of when. It's a question of how.
The debt + unfunded liabilities for the next 30 years (mainly Medicare, not including Obamacare), is > $1M per taxpayer in today's dollars. Does the average taxpayer have $1M to pay in *additional* taxes? No.
Imagine if you owed $1M, you spend 10% more than you earn year after year, and you keep borrowing more money just to pay the *interest* alone on the outstanding balance. What keeps you afloat is your high credit score and thus the interest rate you pay is 2%, limiting the cost of the interest payments to 10% of your monthly expenses. Your only real option to pay it back is to cut your expenses by 30% across the board and never increase it, never borrow more money, and pay down the principal aggressively. You know you have to do that.
But instead, you continue on, and risk getting your credit score dinged - and then your interest rates can triple to 6%, and the 10% of your income which goes to paying just the interest, will climb to 30%. At this point, it will be impossible to repay the debt. You would have to cut your budget by 60%, or simply default and declare bankruptcy.
This is where the Fed Gov is.
Anyone who doesn't agree after checking out the numbers is delusional.
Cutting spending is politically impossible. It has never happened outside of the end of major wars.
The posturing by Congress in recent news, quibbling over 1% of the budget, is just that - posturing. If the Republicans were serious about long term financial solvency, they'd be discussing 30% spending cuts.
Pretty soon there needs to be a vote on the debt ceiling. Legally they need to raise it in order to borrow more money. I will wager my left one that they will raise it, just as they have, year after year. And then the fate of the Fed Gov will be cemented.
It will go insolvent.
Then the gov't budget crisis will get so bad they will *need* to do something. It's a question of which voting blocs, which handout recipients, will be stiffed, and in what sequence.
The Federal Reserve will buy the Treasury Debt - which means inflation. Mass inflation. Like >10% per year. They will stop just short of hyperinflation. Hyperinflation means the money dies. If the money dies, the power of the bankers will die with it. They don't want that.
In the end, the Fed Gov's budget will be cut, and when a gov't's budget is cut, their power is cut.
And then the States will probably invoke the 10th Amendment, and a Great De-Centralization of power will begin.
And then we will finally start to see our liberty increasing instead of decreasing. With liberty comes prosperity.
But not before a period of pain.
Just like Chile and Argentina. They went through a period of pain, then things got better.
The USA has the advantage that the strong entrepreneural spirit is still alive. And the ideas of "leave me alone" and "let's make a deal". That embodies economic freedom, and from that comes prosperity.
The same fate awaits almost all the "liberal" (welfarist) governments of the Western World. The cradle-to-grave welfare model of the West is unsustainable. Almost every welfare gov't is on the road to insolvency. Asia OTOH isn't addled by it. However, Japan, Korea, and China have serious long term demographic problems of their own... But in the medium term, they will be the new economic powerhouses. In the very long term, the Internet has educated a small minority to the ministrations of the various power elite groups around the world, and that they are anti freedom and that freedom and prosperity go hand in hand..... I believe the internet will do today, what the Guttenberg Press did centuries ago. It ended that era's tyranny, and ushered in a new age of prosperity.