Tax and Spend

In his ongoing effort to buy as many votes as he can, Obama orders the transportation department to spend another $473 million on vote-buying projects. Funny how he waited to release this money until a few months before the election.

Every time Paul Ryan tries to explain his support for TARP and bailouts, he looks stupider than the last time. I think Ryan is more dangerous than Obama, Romney or Biden. Like Bush, he has managed to thoroughly fool people into thinking he supports free markets when he obviously is against them as much as Obama is. But we know Obama is against them, therefore we resist him. But people won't resist Ryan's socialism. Or Romney's for the same reason.

The published deficit last year was around $1.5 trillion, but the real deficit, which includes unfunded entitlement liabilities, was around $11 trillion.

"This refers to the unfunded liabilities of the government. These are the price tags of political promises which politicians have made over the years for which there is no money available to fulfill. The expert here is Prof. Lawrence Kotlikoff of Boston University. His most recent report says that total unfunded liabilities went from $211 trillion a year ago to $222 trillion this year."

Think about that in relation to the current political debate between Obama's ever growing budget and Paul Ryan's budget which grows just as fast. The political game between the two parties is a charade. Both parties work together to divide and conquer us through rhetoric while their coordinated actions loot us into destitution.

"The implications of an unfunded liability of $222 trillion are so comprehensive, so stupendous, and so frightening that voters ignore the story. So does Congress."

Voters do. Congressmen do not. Every member of Congress is been well informed of the outcome. They all have escape plans. But like bond purchasers, they think they'll be the ones to profit in the short term and escape when the crap hits the fan. Many are right. But 535 of them are wrong.

"The government will default."

Believe it. It can't do otherwise. The consequences will be catastrophic.

Peter Schiff exposes big spender Paul Ryan.

"(It is extremely disheartening that the top point of contention in the campaign this week is each candidate's assertion that their presidency could be the most trusted not to cut Medicare. Mindful of vulnerabilities among swing state retirees, Republicans have also taken Social Security cuts off the table as well. What hope do we have of reigning in government spending when even supposedly conservative Republicans refuse to consider cuts in the largest and fastest growing federal programs?)"

My goodness. This is an extreme understatement. The reality?

"So what was the Ryan Budget's radical departure from the status quo that has caused such uproar? If enacted today, the Ryan budget would so drastically upend the fiscal picture that the U.S. federal budget would come into balance in just... wait for it.... 27 years! This is because the Ryan budget doesn't actually cut anything. At no point in Ryan's decades long budget timeline does he ever suggest that the government spend less than it had the year before. He doesn't touch a penny in current Social Security or Medicare outlays, nor in the bloated defense budget. His apocalypse inducing departure comes from trying to limit the rate of increase in federal spending to "just" 3.1% annually. This is below the 4.3% rate of increase that is currently baked into the budget, and farther below what we would likely see if Obama's priorities were adopted."

We are all going to suffer immense pain. Pain. So much pain. Why?

"Because there are no actual cuts in his budget, Ryan hopes that fiscal balance can be restored by 2040 only because he assumes that we achieve returns to the annual economic growth that are equal to levels averaged for much of the last century. In other words, he sees slow growth of the last four years as the aberration, not the new normal. As with all other government projections, this is on the extreme optimistic end of the spectrum. In truth, there is nothing on the horizon that should make anyone think these growth figures will be achieved. America's crushing debt, burdensome regulations, political paralysis, and nagging demographic problems bode poorly for the return to trend line growth anytime soon. More likely, based on the speed to which Republicans will shrink from popular backlash, is that the "cuts" that Ryan proposes will be abandoned as soon as they prove to be politically unpopular."

Anybody who thinks that, given our increasing burden of government, will ever grow at 3 percent annually, regularly again, is a fool. Anybody who thinks congressmen will limit their looting to 3.1 percent annually every year is an even bigger fool. Both the Obama and Ryan budget are farces. They both know the US is in rapid decline and will soon suffer the most traumatic collapse in US history. All they want to do is steal as much money from us for themselves and their cronies before that happens as possible.

"In fact, among his other overly-optimistic assumptions are that the unemployment rate falls to 4% by 2015 and an unprecedented 2.8% by 2021, another real estate boom begins almost immediately, and there is an average inflation and ten-year treasury rate for the next ten years of 2.04 and 4.15 respectively. These are assumptions that would make even the most rabid economic cheerleaders sit on their pompoms."

Run for the hills with all your wealth as fast as possible.

"Despite these pollyannish economic growth and record low unemployment projections, Ryan still assumes interest rates will remain near historic lows and that none of the cheap money showered onto the economy will ever find its way into the CPI. In other words, it's the economic equivalent of winning the lottery twice in a row while failing to account for the higher taxes that accompany such good fortune."

You can't make this stuff up. Both the Ryan and Obama budgets are frauds. Everybody in Washington knows they are frauds. They get together and laugh about them while smoking dope and parting with hookers, all paid for with our tax dollars. If you haven't figured out that our government is a fraud that exists for the sole purpose of looting us into destitution, you're not paying attention. Both Obama's and Ryan's budgets are evil, not stupid.

Oliver Wendell Holmes said "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society." There's nothing civilized about the institutional theft of other people's money. Here's a pretty good way to respond to people who support some taxes.

" I am opposed to the use of violence, for any reason except in self-defense."

I would use the term aggression instead of violence. I believe this is by far the best way to answer such a question because it forces the questioner to either advocate aggression, an argument he can't win, or reject it, in which case the libertarian wins. It's a win-win scenario.