I’m very suspicious over it, considering that guy’s been in trouble with the SEC before.
Interesting. I don’t know anything about this guy; it was linked approvingly somewhere and I just found what he had to say controversial. I figured the government, if anyone, should know how their words will be parsed, and would massage it accordingly. The SEC thing certainly raises reasons for skepticism, but does anyone have any thoughts on his interpretation as he lays it out in the page?
There isn’t really anything controversial in the first part of the linke except the writer randomly CAPITALIZES WORDS!! and likes to say we’re DOOMED! and use !!exclamation points!!
But the basic point that, the US’s current rate of deficit spending is unsustainable isn’t exactly the covered up secret that the author makes it out to be. It’s been talked about for much of the last decade, and more so in the last year.
His conclusion from the #2nd report doesn’t make much sense, the current dirth of credit is pretty obviously due to the collapse of the housing market and the wider recession, not treasuries sucking up all the capital. After all, a sizable amount of the current borrowing has been to create money to pipe directly into the banks.
And #3, whether raising money from foreign gov’ts somehow gives them some insidious hold over us, has been covered numerous times on this board, the consensus usually is that its nowhere near the danger some make it out to be.
It strikes me as somewhat creationist-style reasoning. You know, pointing out that since the Moon moves an inch closer to the Earth every year, tracing the trend backwards 4 billion years means the Moon should have crashed into us by now! Therefore the Earth is actually 6000 years old.
Point is, the assumption that these trends will not change is the problem. Yeah, at some point our leaders will have to be deemed insane if nothing changes, but… 2080? I’m sure someone will make a move by then.
That said, I’d be much more comfortable if we owed less.
I don’t want to turn this political, but that article seems to be somewhat right wing. This part isn’t totally true:
And despite all this, neither Congress nor the Obama Administration have proposed a plan or a timetable for averting these doomsday scenarios. Their sole solution is to issue more bonds, borrow more, and print more without restraint.
Obama’s admin is trying to reform health care in part to prevent this financial collapse. The government has about $59 trillion in unfunded mandates for medicare and medicaid. And meaningful health reform that lowers costs and reduces the rate of cost increases will cut into that.
A meaningful health reform package based on the research of the commonwealth fund that cuts medical growth from 6.7% to 5.5% a year will save $3 trillion from 2010-2020. And that is just in the first decade.
So I don’t agree that Obama is doing nothing about this. He knows health is the most expensive part of this problem, and is trying to reform it. We also got $1.1 billion in comparative effectiveness research in the stimulus, and budget director Orszag knows that wasteful spending in healthcare is a huge problem (he has given speeches on it).
So all in all, its a problem. But much of it is health care related. And nobody can claim that this administration isn’t working on health reform.
Furthermore, I think it is a little inaccurate to separate WWII conditions from current effects like Boomer-care. The Boomers are the direct result of WWII. In a way we’re still fighting that war. Think of it as Hitler’s last revenge.
People like the GAO have been producing reports like these for some time now. I’m guessing this is another guy who discovered we have deficit problems on Jan 21st 2009. If anybody can be bothered to look at his archives it’d be interesting to see his attitudes to deficits, opinions on how well the economy was doing etc. from the 2002ish to 2008 period.