This forum post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore GoodTimeCharlie. Show Details
This forum post is hidden because you have submitted an abuse report against it. Show Details
In Response to RE: “Medicare: Strong and Built to Last” by GAGMAN
It seems like either the ENTIRE FAR LEFT LIBERAL/SOCIALIST GROUP ARE SLOW LEARNERS OR I HAVE FAILED TO TEACH THEM ABOUT HOW BROKE BOTH MEDICARE AND SOCIAL SECURITY ARE? AS A TREASURY PROFESSIONAL AND EXPERT IN GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING, I KNOW AND THE GROUP'S LIMITED KNOWLEDGE IS FISCALLY DANGEROUS. READ THE ARTICLE BELOW AND MAYBE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF UNFUNDED LIABILITIES AND THE DEBT CRISIS WILL SINK IN ALONG WITH THE FACT THAT OBAMA TOOK $ 716 BILLION BUCKS FROM SENIORS TO PAY FOR OTHER PARTS OF OBAMACARE.
YOU FAILED AGAIN TO MENTION THAT MEDICARE IS THE REAL IMMEDIATE PROBLEM OF WHICH NO ONE NOT EVEN THE FAR LEFT DISAGREES....THE MEDICARE UNFUNDED LIABILITY IS OVER $ 30 TRILLION DOLLARS ACCORDING TO THE LAST TRUSTEE'S REPORT IN 2012....AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CASH TO FUND IT...IF SO WHY WOULD OBAMA SAY THAT SS AND MEDICARE WOULD NOT BE PAID UNLESS WE BORROW MORE BUCKS?
Medicare Faces Unfunded Liability of $38.6T, or $328,404 for Each U.S. Household
The unfunded liability is the amount that has been promised in benefits to people now alive that will not be funded by the tax revenue the system is expected to take in to pay for those benefits. (The Medicare Trustees calculate the unfunded liability for a period of 75 years into the future.)
The $38.6 trillion in unfunded benefits Medicare is expected to pay over the next 75 years equals $328,404.43 for each of the 117,538,000 households the Census Bureau said there were in the United States in 2010.
The GAAP In The Debt Debate
There’s a fascinating (and enraging to both sides) argument going on over whether debt really matters. On one side are the Austrian-inspired hard money advocates who see excessive borrowing as even worse for governments than it is for individuals and families. On the other side are the Krugman/Bernanke Keynesians who think debt is no big deal if that’s what it takes to sustain “aggregate demand”. But of course you know all this.
An interesting and less well-understood offshoot of this argument involves the nature of debt. Is it strictly limited to contracts with specific repayment terms? Or should unfunded liabilities be seen as money owed? If the latter, then we owe a hell of a lot more than we think we do. Not surprisingly, the battle lines are identical to those of the greater debt debate, with followers of Hayek and von Mises (like Ron Paul and Peter Schiff) on one side and Keynes, Krugman and president Obama on the other.