Mark Steyn reports that America’s young people are even dumber than they appear:
Just between you, me, and the old, the late middle-aged and the early middle-aged: Isn’t it terrific to be able to stick it to the young? I mean, imagine how bad all this economic-type stuff would be if our kids and grandkids hadn’t offered to pick up the tab.
Well, OK, they didn’t exactly “offer” but they did stand around behind Barack Obama at all those campaign rallies helping him look dynamic and telegenic and earnestly chanting hopey-hopey-changey-changey. And “Yes, we can!”
Which is a pretty open-ended commitment.
Like others, they asked for it.
To think that young people are going to be disproportionally hurt by the economic decisions of Obama is absurd. It is those who will be retiring much sooner who should be panicking over the economy, as those people are in many cases 30-40% less “wealthy” than they were a few years ago in the midst of the Economic Bubble Good Times Gravy Train Years (your years may vary, but Fall 2008 is the usual end date.) In other words, Obama wasn’t even there, so a great portion of the damage done wasn’t on his watch.
In some ways, if Obama continues to spend like a trust fund baby on a bender after having an affair with the trustee, the resulting inflation will again harm the older people disproportionally. Savings won’t go poof, just wealth.
It’s all about the spending in government, not the taxes. If going from a top rate of 35% to about 39% is the difference between a capitalist wet dream and a socialist labor camp, maybe we should just split the difference at 37% and then concentrate on the spending side of the damn governmental equation. But as long as the right wants to concentrate on taxes only, they’ll keep on losing this argument since the “Going Galt” angle has very limited appeal.
Historical Debt Outstanding – Annual 2005 – 2008
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
That figure for 2008 includes Bush’s $700 billion TARP – the one that did not have any Congressional oversight. President Obama’s Recovery Act was for under $800 billion( one third of which were tax cuts – is Mr. Steyn and this site suggesting there should not have been any tax cuts for the sake of our grand kids), less then a tenth of the total federal debt left by eight years of borrow spend government. If we use Steyn’s logic nine tenth’s of our pity for future generations is due to Bush 43 plus one tenth for President Obama’s stimulus package. Future generations will also, if we follow Steyn’s logic learn that one should twist facts and turn logic on its ear in order to avoid nine tenths of one’s accountability.
What, you mean they’re not being saddled with trillions of dollars of debt they didn’t previously have?
Do tell.
Adam, are you seriously arguing that tax cuts create deficits all by themselves?
And your chart starts too early for the argument you’re making. Outstanding federal debt goes back to the 1960s.
…late. Sorry.
Smith –
What, you think I’m going to come out defending Bush and the Republican Congress after spending years lambasting them for their outrageous spending habits? Hardly.
That said, it’s a safe bet that virtually all of Obama’s new spending will get “baselined,” and that therefore we’re looking at trillion dollar deficits, or bigger, for as far as the eye can see. We’re looking at a Federal government which grew to 21% of GDP under Bush (bad), to 25% or bigger under Obama (worse).
It averaged about 18% under Clinton. I miss that guy.
So, yes, Obama is saddling our kids with unprecedented deficits, and, yes, they are idiots to support him.
The inflation is going to hurt everyone, but those on fixed incomes (read: older people) are going to get slammed much more than the young. That’s what I was referrring to by calling the premise absurd.
At some point, inflation is going to kick in. It has been controlled for a long time, and that cannot last forever any more than inflated home prices will be sustained, tech stocks will always rise, or oil will always be plentiful. Like all changes, inflation will have winners and losers. Those in debt would have a good time, while those responsible people who assumed all would stay as it is would become losers. What’s the likelihood that inflation will remain in check?
Our spending and borrowing is the problem that got us here, is being tried as a way to get things back on track, and it won’t work. Printing up more money is one solution that screws many people but balances the books better than the hard options. And foreign investors and domestic retirees are just going to have to eat it. China’s grumbling is them realizing they bought into this mess, while all the banks realized the game was up last fall.
Whether it was Obama or McCain, that was the scenario and all the chopped earmarks in the world weren’t going to make things much different.
Once inflation kicks in the older people will just vote themselves more bennies and the democrats will be more than happy to provide.