• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What are unfunded liabilities and how do they threaten the future of American fiscal stability? (1 Viewer)

marke

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2018
Messages
34,752
Reaction score
3,961
Location
north carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The US has $210 Trillion Worth of Unfunded Liabilities...

An old statute requires the Treasury to issue an annual financial statement, similar to a corporation's annual report. The FY 2016 edition is 274 enlightening pages that the government hopes none of us will read.

Among the many tidbits, it contains a table on page 63 that reveals the net present value of the US government's 75-year future liability for Social Security and Medicare.

That amount exceeds the net present value of the tax revenue designed to pay those benefits by $46.7 trillion. Yes, trillions.

Where will this $46.7 trillion come from? We don't know.


Your Pension Is a Lie: There's $210 Trillion Of Liabilities Our Government Can't Fulfill
 
When a child is born, it has a lifetime of unfunded liabilities. As has been stated countless times to these types of posts, a government that issues its own currency and has debts in the currency it alone can issue can never, ever run out of money or stop paying its liabilities.
 
The US has $210 Trillion Worth of Unfunded Liabilities...

An old statute requires the Treasury to issue an annual financial statement, similar to a corporation's annual report. The FY 2016 edition is 274 enlightening pages that the government hopes none of us will read.

Among the many tidbits, it contains a table on page 63 that reveals the net present value of the US government's 75-year future liability for Social Security and Medicare.

That amount exceeds the net present value of the tax revenue designed to pay those benefits by $46.7 trillion. Yes, trillions.

Where will this $46.7 trillion come from? We don't know.


Your Pension Is a Lie: There's $210 Trillion Of Liabilities Our Government Can't Fulfill

ALAN Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, once asked about the likelihood of the US government going bankrupt replied to paraphrase: "We can never go bankrupt because we have a printing press." However wealth is not created by printing money, whether it is printed by the Fed or by another counterfeiter.
Images which come to mind: During the French Revolution, printing presses were dragged out into the street from the Bastille and destroyed with sledge hammers. If you google the First Coinage Act of 1792 notice in paragraph #1 that the dollar is defined as a coin containing 371 grains and four sixteenth of a grain of silver. Professor Richard Timberlake of Georgia wrote a book entitled Constitutional Money: A Review of Supreme Court Monetary Decisions in which it is clear that the Founders held that nothing other than gold and silver coins are tender for payment of debts. Explicitly stated in Article 1 Section 10.
n the nineteenth paragraph of the first Coinage Act of 1792 you will find that debasing the currency is considered a felony punishable by death.
The image is of Ron Paul's act to Audit the Fed finally passing hopefully identifying those who own the Fed and subjecting them to the punishment they deserve.

After all the purchasing power of the dollar since the FEd was created in 1913 has declined by over 98%.
 
So long as the interest rate is less than the general rate of inflation it is a good idea to borrow as much as possible. If $1 borrowed is worth an hour of labor and can be paid back later with $1 which is then worth 15 minutes of labor then it would be foolish not to do so.
 
ALAN Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, once asked about the likelihood of the US government going bankrupt replied to paraphrase: "We can never go bankrupt because we have a printing press." However wealth is not created by printing money, whether it is printed by the Fed or by another counterfeiter.
Images which come to mind: During the French Revolution, printing presses were dragged out into the street from the Bastille and destroyed with sledge hammers. If you google the First Coinage Act of 1792 notice in paragraph #1 that the dollar is defined as a coin containing 371 grains and four sixteenth of a grain of silver. Professor Richard Timberlake of Georgia wrote a book entitled Constitutional Money: A Review of Supreme Court Monetary Decisions in which it is clear that the Founders held that nothing other than gold and silver coins are tender for payment of debts. Explicitly stated in Article 1 Section 10.
n the nineteenth paragraph of the first Coinage Act of 1792 you will find that debasing the currency is considered a felony punishable by death.
The image is of Ron Paul's act to Audit the Fed finally passing hopefully identifying those who own the Fed and subjecting them to the punishment they deserve.

After all the purchasing power of the dollar since the FEd was created in 1913 has declined by over 98%.


Are there any countries left in the world that still use the gold standard for their money, I don't think so.
Why a gold standard is a very bad idea — Money, Banking and Financial Markets
 
The US has $210 Trillion Worth of Unfunded Liabilities...

An old statute requires the Treasury to issue an annual financial statement, similar to a corporation's annual report. The FY 2016 edition is 274 enlightening pages that the government hopes none of us will read.

Among the many tidbits, it contains a table on page 63 that reveals the net present value of the US government's 75-year future liability for Social Security and Medicare.

That amount exceeds the net present value of the tax revenue designed to pay those benefits by $46.7 trillion. Yes, trillions.

Where will this $46.7 trillion come from? We don't know.


Your Pension Is a Lie: There's $210 Trillion Of Liabilities Our Government Can't Fulfill

Odd you forgot the 2017 tax cut unfunded liability. Now why is that?
 
When a child is born, it has a lifetime of unfunded liabilities. As has been stated countless times to these types of posts, a government that issues its own currency and has debts in the currency it alone can issue can never, ever run out of money or stop paying its liabilities.

You are overlooking a great number of facts and omitting huge details. The Office of Economic Policy of the US Department of Treasury issued this report in May 2009: SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE TRUST FUNDS AND THE FEDERAL BUDGET.

Here are quotes:

From the budget perspective, the first line of Table 4 represents the value of resources needed to finance each of the programs into the infinite future. The total resources needed for all the programs sums to $106.8 trillion in present value terms. This need can be satisfied ONLY THROUGH INCREASED BORROWING, HIGHER TAXES, REDUCED PROGRAM SPENDING, OR SOME COMBINATION THEREOF.

Does the US have unlimited money? No. Even democrats know this which is why they are constantly supporting raising taxes on Americans to fund the wild spending policies of the democrat party.
 
So long as the interest rate is less than the general rate of inflation it is a good idea to borrow as much as possible. If $1 borrowed is worth an hour of labor and can be paid back later with $1 which is then worth 15 minutes of labor then it would be foolish not to do so.

The US government has turned borrowing into something similar to a Ponzi scheme. The problem with borrowing Ponzi schemes is that those employing the schemes eventually run out of sources from which to continue their out of control borrowing addictions. That is what the US is also facing.

Access Denied

The U.S. Is Running Out of Sources for Borrowing Money, The U.S. government is running up the debt while running out of places to borrow, By Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan, Jan. 4, 2017, at 12:45 pm.

U.S. News, Economic Intelligence
 
Last edited:
Odd you forgot the 2017 tax cut unfunded liability. Now why is that?

Democrats know the government needs every tax dollar it can suck out of working Americans to pay for the huge expenses our dim-witted politicians have obligated us to pay.
 
The US government has turned borrowing into something similar to a Ponzi scheme. The problem with borrowing Ponzi schemes is that those employing the schemes eventually run out of sources from which to continue their out of control borrowing addictions. That is what the US is also facing.

Access Denied

The U.S. Is Running Out of Sources for Borrowing Money, The U.S. government is running up the debt while running out of places to borrow, By Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan, Jan. 4, 2017, at 12:45 pm.

U.S. News, Economic Intelligence

Hmm... that alleged serious problem did not prevent them from borrowing almost $2T more since January 2017.
 
ALAN Greenspan, former Federal Reserve Chairman, once asked about the likelihood of the US government going bankrupt replied to paraphrase: "We can never go bankrupt because we have a printing press." However wealth is not created by printing money, whether it is printed by the Fed or by another counterfeiter.
Images which come to mind: During the French Revolution, printing presses were dragged out into the street from the Bastille and destroyed with sledge hammers. If you google the First Coinage Act of 1792 notice in paragraph #1 that the dollar is defined as a coin containing 371 grains and four sixteenth of a grain of silver. Professor Richard Timberlake of Georgia wrote a book entitled Constitutional Money: A Review of Supreme Court Monetary Decisions in which it is clear that the Founders held that nothing other than gold and silver coins are tender for payment of debts. Explicitly stated in Article 1 Section 10.
n the nineteenth paragraph of the first Coinage Act of 1792 you will find that debasing the currency is considered a felony punishable by death.
The image is of Ron Paul's act to Audit the Fed finally passing hopefully identifying those who own the Fed and subjecting them to the punishment they deserve.

After all the purchasing power of the dollar since the FEd was created in 1913 has declined by over 98%.


All wonderful history but just a snapshot of history, go back to the very founding of money as a medium and you will see many different forms of money and lots of different views on money itself. One constant though seems to be prevalent for ages, compound interest is the work of the devil. Comparing our system to what was in place in 1792 is a waste of time. Money is created by the state for the purposes of the state on behalf of the people and its financial interests. We will never, ever go back to the gold standard.
 
The US government has turned borrowing into something similar to a Ponzi scheme. The problem with borrowing Ponzi schemes is that those employing the schemes eventually run out of sources from which to continue their out of control borrowing addictions. That is what the US is also facing.

Access Denied

The U.S. Is Running Out of Sources for Borrowing Money, The U.S. government is running up the debt while running out of places to borrow, By Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan, Jan. 4, 2017, at 12:45 pm.

U.S. News, Economic Intelligence

Absurd, every auction sells out. If they can't sell, they raise the interest rate. If that becomes an issue, we can pass a law that allows the treasury to spend without going through the Fed or issuing bonds. Its all just a matter of legislation folks. It was set up this way on purpose, it can just as easily be changed if circumstances demand it.
 
You are overlooking a great number of facts and omitting huge details. The Office of Economic Policy of the US Department of Treasury issued this report in May 2009: SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE TRUST FUNDS AND THE FEDERAL BUDGET.

Here are quotes:

From the budget perspective, the first line of Table 4 represents the value of resources needed to finance each of the programs into the infinite future. The total resources needed for all the programs sums to $106.8 trillion in present value terms. This need can be satisfied ONLY THROUGH INCREASED BORROWING, HIGHER TAXES, REDUCED PROGRAM SPENDING, OR SOME COMBINATION THEREOF.

Does the US have unlimited money? No. Even democrats know this which is why they are constantly supporting raising taxes on Americans to fund the wild spending policies of the democrat party.

Pass a law adding more options then. See how easy your problem disappears?
 
Before they would raise the interest rate, the Fed would simply buy up bonds. The Fed could buy up all the bonds it wants to.
 
The men who came forward to fight the Redcoats were paid with a newly created paper currency called Continentals. I believe they were promised that someday it would be redeemable, meaning exchanged for a real coin, but that promise was never kept.
In Article 1 Section 8 among the only powers granted to the new Congress by the Founders is one which states: "shall have the power to coin money and establish the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and to fix the standard of weights and measures." The reason "foreign coin" is mentioned is because those were the current money of that period and consisted of coins made in Britain, France and Spain, in fact the most common was the Spanish milled dollar whose average content of silver was just what the new U.S. Dollar was defined as containing in the First Coinage Act of 1792: 371 grains and four sixteenth of a grain of silver.

The fact that no country in the world today has a gold standard shows that all countries followed the example of the U.S.by no longer backing their own currencies with gold and silver, since Nixon foolishly closed the Gold Window in August 15th 1971. Gold backed currency is hated by politicians who wish to be able to create money out of paper and ink so they can spend more than they take in in taxation from those who produce.
One reason the Founders sought to create a Constitution with a strong central government endowed with the power to tax was to replace the Articles of Confederation of the thirteen former colonies which did not have the power to tax, and that is why the Anti-Federalists opposed ratification of the Constitution. Still no power was granted in the Constitution to create a central bank such as the Federal Reserve System.

Take heart, there is a movement in the colleges to recruit young men and women whose lives are ahead of them, and whose minds are open to the wisdom of rational thinkers, such as Ludwig von Mises, F.A Hayek, Bastiat, the Austrian School of Economics, Ayn Rand, David Kelley, The Objectivists, Jacob Hornberger, The Atlas Society, The Ayn Rand Institute, Café Hayek, Foundation For Economic Education, Future of Freedom Foundation, Students For Liberty, Young Americans for Liberty, the Independent Institute, Cato Institute, Reason Foundation, Institute of Humane Studies (theIHS.com) and more.

Their numbers are growing close to exponentially and they are on a couple of thousands of college campuses and growing.

So there is hope that the day will come where most educated voters will no longer be confronted with the kind of choices we have had over the last century at all levels of government. Did any one notice that Gary Johnson received as many as 4.8 million votes in the last election for president despite being ignored by the media. Did you know that the Libertarian Party first presidential and vice presidential candidates in 1972 received an Electoral College vote. The man who cast that vote had done his doctoral dissertation on the Electoral College system and the woman Tonie Nathan who received that vote for vice president was the first woman in American history to have gotten an Electoral College Vote!
 
After all the purchasing power of the dollar since the FEd was created in 1913 has declined by over 98%.

This is a dumb argument. What was a child able to purchase with their (over 40 hours/week) labor in 1913?

Were people in 1913 all fabulously wealthy because that was the year somebody chose to measure the value of a dollar, and a dollar had "100% purchasing power" back then?
 
The men who came forward to fight the Redcoats were paid with a newly created paper currency called Continentals. I believe they were promised that someday it would be redeemable, meaning exchanged for a real coin, but that promise was never kept.
In Article 1 Section 8 among the only powers granted to the new Congress by the Founders is one which states: "shall have the power to coin money and establish the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and to fix the standard of weights and measures." The reason "foreign coin" is mentioned is because those were the current money of that period and consisted of coins made in Britain, France and Spain, in fact the most common was the Spanish milled dollar whose average content of silver was just what the new U.S. Dollar was defined as containing in the First Coinage Act of 1792: 371 grains and four sixteenth of a grain of silver.

The fact that no country in the world today has a gold standard shows that all countries followed the example of the U.S.by no longer backing their own currencies with gold and silver, since Nixon foolishly closed the Gold Window in August 15th 1971. Gold backed currency is hated by politicians who wish to be able to create money out of paper and ink so they can spend more than they take in in taxation from those who produce.
One reason the Founders sought to create a Constitution with a strong central government endowed with the power to tax was to replace the Articles of Confederation of the thirteen former colonies which did not have the power to tax, and that is why the Anti-Federalists opposed ratification of the Constitution. Still no power was granted in the Constitution to create a central bank such as the Federal Reserve System.

Take heart, there is a movement in the colleges to recruit young men and women whose lives are ahead of them, and whose minds are open to the wisdom of rational thinkers, such as Ludwig von Mises, F.A Hayek, Bastiat, the Austrian School of Economics, Ayn Rand, David Kelley, The Objectivists, Jacob Hornberger, The Atlas Society, The Ayn Rand Institute, Café Hayek, Foundation For Economic Education, Future of Freedom Foundation, Students For Liberty, Young Americans for Liberty, the Independent Institute, Cato Institute, Reason Foundation, Institute of Humane Studies (theIHS.com) and more.

Their numbers are growing close to exponentially and they are on a couple of thousands of college campuses and growing.

So there is hope that the day will come where most educated voters will no longer be confronted with the kind of choices we have had over the last century at all levels of government. Did any one notice that Gary Johnson received as many as 4.8 million votes in the last election for president despite being ignored by the media. Did you know that the Libertarian Party first presidential and vice presidential candidates in 1972 received an Electoral College vote. The man who cast that vote had done his doctoral dissertation on the Electoral College system and the woman Tonie Nathan who received that vote for vice president was the first woman in American history to have gotten an Electoral College Vote!

Boy, that is some list...thankfully all of them are so marginalized that none of us will ever have to endure their advice except as rhetorical debates within the even smaller libertarian spheres one sees from Ron Paul followers. The world of economics will always change with the times as money and the goals of the state and global economies develop over time. There are very few if any absolutes in economic theory. Good theory describes what is and leaves the "ought" question to politicians. I suggest you give MMT a good review, you may find it solves many of the problems you think exist with the abandonment of the gold standard.
 
So long as the interest rate is less than the general rate of inflation it is a good idea to borrow as much as possible. If $1 borrowed is worth an hour of labor and can be paid back later with $1 which is then worth 15 minutes of labor then it would be foolish not to do so.

That doesn't really work for the issuer of the currency. They really have nothing to gain or lose from changing interest rates, since they aren't really borrowing money, and they don't have to expend real resources in order to extinguish their debt.
 
You are overlooking a great number of facts and omitting huge details. The Office of Economic Policy of the US Department of Treasury issued this report in May 2009: SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE TRUST FUNDS AND THE FEDERAL BUDGET.

Here are quotes:

From the budget perspective, the first line of Table 4 represents the value of resources needed to finance each of the programs into the infinite future. The total resources needed for all the programs sums to $106.8 trillion in present value terms. This need can be satisfied ONLY THROUGH INCREASED BORROWING, HIGHER TAXES, REDUCED PROGRAM SPENDING, OR SOME COMBINATION THEREOF.

Does the US have unlimited money? No. Even democrats know this which is why they are constantly supporting raising taxes on Americans to fund the wild spending policies of the democrat party.

The only difference between an "unfunded liability" and a future bill is that some future bills are written into law, and some are not. SS benefits are somewhat defined. Defense spending is not. Both are bills that we are going to be paying well into the foreseeable future. But one is an "unfunded liability" and one is merely a gigantic future expense that is growing every year.

Does the U.S. have unlimited money? YES! For crissakes, if you don't demonstrate some progress in absorbing these lessons pretty soon, we're going to ignore your threads. Learn what you are able to learn, and move forward with better questions. Don't just sit there, spinning your wheels, stuck in the same (anti)intellectual rut like all the other conservatives.
 
This is a dumb argument. What was a child able to purchase with their (over 40 hours/week) labor in 1913?

Were people in 1913 all fabulously wealthy because that was the year somebody chose to measure the value of a dollar, and a dollar had "100% purchasing power" back then?

I suggest he exchange his current lifestyle for one that was common to all our ancestors in 1913. He would last about a week before screaming for help.
 
Absurd, every auction sells out. If they can't sell, they raise the interest rate. If that becomes an issue, we can pass a law that allows the treasury to spend without going through the Fed or issuing bonds. Its all just a matter of legislation folks. It was set up this way on purpose, it can just as easily be changed if circumstances demand it.

You claim the US has unlimited ability to borrow but that is not what federal officials are saying.
 
Before they would raise the interest rate, the Fed would simply buy up bonds. The Fed could buy up all the bonds it wants to.

If the 'Fed' can spend all the money it wants to without negative consequence then why does the Treasury Department say spending cuts and tax hikes will be necessary to meet liability shortfalls in the future?
 
The only difference between an "unfunded liability" and a future bill is that some future bills are written into law, and some are not. SS benefits are somewhat defined. Defense spending is not. Both are bills that we are going to be paying well into the foreseeable future. But one is an "unfunded liability" and one is merely a gigantic future expense that is growing every year.

Does the U.S. have unlimited money? YES! For crissakes, if you don't demonstrate some progress in absorbing these lessons pretty soon, we're going to ignore your threads. Learn what you are able to learn, and move forward with better questions. Don't just sit there, spinning your wheels, stuck in the same (anti)intellectual rut like all the other conservatives.

Ignorance exposes uneducated people to foolish ideas that the US government cannot possibly fail to honor its fiscal obligations in the future.
 
If the 'Fed' can spend all the money it wants to without negative consequence then why does the Treasury Department say spending cuts and tax hikes will be necessary to meet liability shortfalls in the future?

First of all, the Fed doesn't spend money. Buying debt is how banks operate. It's how they make a profit.

Second, since I assume you meant to say that the "government can spend all the money it wants without negative consequences," nobody (except you strawman-builders) has ever claimed that they can spend without consequence. (Go back and read what I wrote, you won't find any examples of me saying that a government can spend tons of money without consequence.) Governments can create money without limit, or cost. That means they can pay all of their bills that are denominated in dollars. It doesn't mean that they can buy a billion cars from Ford. The government can only buy what the economy is able to produce. If there are enough healthcare facilities, doctors, drugs, etc., then the government could pay to cover everybody's healthcare. That is the real limit - what the economy can produce.

Why does the government say that there will be shortfalls in the future? Because they are talking about SS and it's present situation within existing laws. The government isn't running out of money, they are merely refusing (thanks, republicans) to change what gets added to SS so it looks like it's going broke.

If you had decided 30-40 years ago to start a "fund" to pay electric bills for the rest of your life by opening up a separate account and putting away $50/month (more than your electric bills at the time), you would surely be running that account in the red by now, and it would be well on its way to a negative balance. Does that mean you are unable to pay your electric bill? No, it just means you underestimated your budget 30-40 years ago. Would you be wetting your pants over the possibility of your lights being shut off for lack of payment? Maybe, if you can't learn anything from what people are trying to explain to you.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom