Posted on 12/28/2010 5:24:30 AM PST by tgdunbar
The history of public debt is the very history of national power: how it has been won and how it has been lost. Dreams and impatience have always driven men in power to draw on the resources of others—be it slaves, the inhabitants of occupied lands, or their own children yet to be born—in order to carry out their schemes, to consolidate power, to grow their own fortunes. But never, outside periods of total war, has the debt of the world’s most powerful states grown so immense. Never has it so heavily threatened their political systems and standards of living. Public debt cannot keep growing without unleashing terrible catastrophes.
Anyone saying this today is accused of pessimism. The first signs of economic recovery, harbingers of a supposedly falling debt, are held up to contradict him. Yet we wouldn’t be the first to think ourselves uniquely able to escape the fate of other states felled by their debt, such as the Republic of Venice, Renaissance Genoa, or the Empire of Spain.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
"How do we break the deadlock? The first step is to recognize that the worst is possible. History provides lessons. The first concerns the very nature of public debt: it is an obligation handed down from the present generation to future ones. The latter must always pay, one way or another—which is why public debt is acceptable only under certain conditions."
It’s a little late for Newsweek to be channeling Milton Friedman. They’ve already had their own near death experience. They should realize that the worst has happened.
maybe Newsweek is like Dylan’s Rosemary:
“She had done a lot of bad things, even once tried suicide
Was lookin’ to do just one good deed before she died”
I found this article interesting and pertinent:
...one must parse unwise debt (debt that finances running costs) from intelligent debt (public infrastructure for energy, transport, health care, or education).
All these, and similar problems, disappear if you require any new spending program to be accompanied with the means to fund it. That is, any new program must have a fee structure or tax associated with it or it doesn’t even get considered. Of course, this would never happen with the spineless idiots we seem to place in office who prefer to buy their job now and let some future generation pay for it.
Yes, it’s too late. The collapse will come, and if I had a crystal ball I would get rich.
My lamentable lack of oracular powers notwithstanding, there is no practical fix for our economic problems. Of course, anyone can come up with a rational plan for pulling back from disaster, but high purpose and rationality have little to do with public policy, especially in the public policy formulated by politicians representing a people whose character is as corrupted as ours.
We will see some half measures; brave initiatives that will fail; and, ultimately, a financial crisis and social disruption. Whether the left is able to use these developments to consolitate its power remains to be seen. But I would suggest that the energies of those who actually care about ordered liberty - which is inseparable from property rights and Christian moral standards - had better spend more time educating others about what will come and why and in preparing for it than in piddling away time and energy on politics.
We can use politics to gain time to prepare and organize, but political activity will not change what is coming; it will only marginally delay it.
Just because the author does not use the word “entitlements” does not mean they are left out. I’d think most readers would realize that entitlements make up most of the “unwise debt”. Also, while “running costs” are, as you say, the cost of government, the issue is rather funding them with ever increasing debt and not the running costs themselves.
I’m not sure collapse is inevitable, but the way forward will definitely involve painful choices. I know the ones I’d prefer, but they may not be politically achievable.
Sadly you're spot on. If history is any guide the period following the great fall will not be a pretty one.
What? Me worry?
The maintenance cost and the price tag to operate all this infrastructure has got to be huge.
Greedy, power hungry, self serving individuals have run this nation into the ground for decades.
Once upon a time, our leaders attempted to protect America, her standard of living, her well being.
Not any longer, it's all about money and power.
Multi-national corps lobby politicians, contribute generously to help get them elected, heap perks upon them while in office.
What do these greedy elites get in return?
Policy that allow them to starve our economy through outsourcing, huge bailouts when their bottom line suffers a few points, and the ability to go overseas and create an almost limitless new consumer pool in China / India.
It's not always about, “Americans want cheaper goods” or “doing the jobs Americans won't do”, it's about greed.
Knowingly placing your country at jeopardy once upon a time was a crime!
Our leaders have failed the American people. Border security, immigration enforcement, fiscal mismanagement, lopsided trade negotiations, over regulating, too many overlapping laws, over taxation....the list goes on.
America is dying and we still allow over 1 million LEGAL immigrants in a year.....not to mention the twenty or so million illegals already here.
If one didn't know better, ya’d almost think this all was on purpose!
America's leaders haven't failed the American people. America's citizens have failed themselves, and their country. One big factor in how we ended up in this situation is that even many "conservatives" support limited government but insist that their pet programs or the government programs that benefit them must be protected at all cost.
If you have any doubts about this, just browse through any thread on this subject and see how many truly principled conservatives here on FreeRepublic are adamantly opposed to any reductions in entitlement spending.
But never, outside periods of total war, has the debt of the world's most powerful states grown so immense.
It's worth remembering that in 1801, when Jefferson became president, the US national debt was around $100 million, about 10 times annual federal revenues. This was literally "the cost of freedom," and would correspond today to a national debt around $30 trillion. Since our actual national debt is $13+ trillion, the government is in better financial shape today than it was in Jefferson's time. And at the time, Jefferson's number one priority was paying down the national debt. So, how did he do it? How does ANY wise government ever increase its revenues? Yes, that's right! JEFFERSON REDUCED GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND CUT TAXES.-- BroJoeKThank BroJoeK, and for that matter, thanks President Jefferson.
>>>If you have any doubts about this, just browse through any thread on this subject and see how many truly principled conservatives here on FreeRepublic are adamantly opposed to any reductions in entitlement spending.<<<
That list doesn’t include me. It’s been my good fortune to have been broke to the point of almost nothing twice in my life, and my wife comes from a coutry with very little in the way of entitlement spending - no food stamps, no unemployment insurance, no welfare. Together we have lived within our means, and when the system collapses, we will still have a roof over our heads and food on the table. We are teaching our son the same skills.
I fully expect to have nothing at all when I’m at retirement age, frankly, and as a teacher, I expect whatever pension has been promised will either be looted or worthless. I’m not looking forward to that, but I’m doing my best to be ready for the eventuality.
If I’m wrong, no harm done. If I’m right, at least the fall won’t crush me.
However...
I think you’re right, too. I live in Alaska, and there’s a reason Ted Stevens and Lisa Murkowski were and are in the U.S. Senate. Alaska, sadly, depends heavily on federal largesse - in part because we’re unable to develop our own resources, but in large part, as you say, that people have developed a taste for suckling on the federal teat.
Be well and God help us.
Exactly how would you leave out entitlements? It doesn’t make any sense not to trim those.
Yes—that was my point.
I have a better idea than gold: Real Estate.
There is dollar deflation in real estate which cannot go on forever.
The risk from a dollar turn-around is less.
As Will Rogers said,”Buy land. They’re not making any more of it.”
No mortgages however. Cash only, just like gold.
Great post — gotta love that attitude!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.