Replies

Traficant was a Democrat and was expelled from the House after being convicted and sentenced to eight years in a federal penitentiary. Some of the rant that you linked is factually based. I have not tried to discover how much is conjecture or how much has been surmised.

Without substantiating anything, there is some relevant history and it does tie to the topic of discussion, forcing the federal government to live within the Constitution.

Socialism is unconstitutional.
Every socialistic program creates a block of voters.
Politicians bid for those blocks of votes by promising benefits that exceed the amount of taxes that have to be collected to pay for the promised benefits. This is the implied free lunch that every government handout offers.
The federal debt has two components. The amounts borrowed to pay for wars and the amounts borrowed to pay for the gap between taxes collected and benefits paid out under socialism. Part of the "free lunch" is hidden here. As is plainly evident, the US has never repaid and has no intention of every repaying any part of the principle. Will US creditors ever become concerned about lending money to the United States?
When benefits can not be conveniently paid through debt, the Federal Reserve makes it possible to simply print Federal Reserve Notes, as "money substitutes" to monetize any shortfalls. Inflation is said to be the cruelest tax. What has the Federal Reserve done to the value of your dollars? Click the link and see for yourself.
Democrats claim the socialistic welfare programs work and are extremely popular with the people. There is no question that these programs would be expected to be popular with beneficiaries who are in effect receiving real free money. There is no question, that people currently paying into Social Security are eagerly looking forward to collecting the benefits they have been promised as a form of "recovering some of their investment" even if they are uncertain whether they will recover all they paid in, let alone whether they have any hopes of receiving any income from their paid-in capital.
If these programs are as popular as Democrats claim or believe, why is participation in Social Security and Medicare mandatory in a supposedly free country?
Why do discussions of making these programs voluntary send Democrats and 'moderate' Republicans into hysteria?
Do these programs work? If the goal is getting votes for Democrats, they certainly worked almost flawlessly from 1936 through 1994.
If Republicans have become part of the problem, they still may be electing enough socialistic politicians to ensure mandatory participation.
If the goal is to help the American people, that is another story. The entire estimated total private net worth (corporate, charitable, and individual) of the United States is estimated in round numbers at $45 Trillion. On the other hand the estimated costs of only two of the welfare programs, Social Security and Medicare, exceeds the total projected income of these programs by roughly an equal amount.
The US Treasury allows itself the same type of accounting used by Enron and Global Crossing. It will not actually book the unfunded liabilities until the date they actually become payable. Would your accountant adise you to file for bankruptcy now before the law changes later this year if your real balance sheet looked like Enron's or the government of the United States? Technically, the US cannot become insolvent because it can print any amount of currency needed to satisfy its dollar denominated assets.
Once considered the world's only risk free investment, both Moody's and Standard & Poor's have had discussions regarding the potential future downgrading of the bonds of the United States.
The Comptroller of the Currency is on record as saying the US economy has never grown at a rate that would be needed to close the shortfall between expenses and revenues for these two programs.
In what has been described as the "Goldilocks" economy, the United States has been cash flow negative from $1.5-2.5 billion dollars every day for the past two years and the gap between income and expenditures is still widening.
You tell me what US workers can manufacture cheaper and better than Chinese or other Asian workers?
Given the data and estimates above, do you believe US standards of living are going to rise or fall?
Do you believe the United States government can pay the promised benefits to Social Security and Medicare recipients? How? Will your children and grandchildren pay the amount of tax that would be required?
History says that all democracies end in bankruptcy or hyperinflation whenever the public learns to vote itself benefits from the public treasury. Precisely how is the United States going to escape this fate?

Would anyone like to comment or add their thoughts to the comments or questions above?

Would any of you be kind enough to share your thoughts about the comments or questions raised above?

When benefits can not be conveniently paid through debt, the Federal Reserve makes it possible to simply print Federal Reserve Notes, as "money substitutes" to monetize any shortfalls. Inflation is said to be the cruelest tax. What has the Federal Reserve done to the value of your dollars? Click the link and see for yourself.

$1.oo 1977-1981 under Carter with inflation = $1.50

$1.oo 1981-1989 under Reagan with inflation = $1.36

$1.oo 1989-1993 under Bush Sr. with inflation = $1.17

$1.oo 1993-2001 under Clinton with inflation = $1.22

$1.oo 2001-2005 under George W Bush with inflation = $1.10

Clearly Ronald Reagan turned the tide away from Carters disaster.