Everyone needs to break out their check books

[Hotrod]

http://usatoday.printthis.clickabili...partnerID=1660


The federal government recorded a $1.3 trillion loss last year — far more than the official $248 billion deficit — when corporate-style accounting standards are used, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

The loss reflects a continued deterioration in the finances of Social Security and government retirement programs for civil servants and military personnel. The loss — equal to $11,434 per household — is more than Americans paid in income taxes in 2006.

"We're on an unsustainable path and doing a great disservice to future generations," says Chris Chocola, a former Republican member of Congress from Indiana and corporate chief executive who is pushing for more accurate federal accounting.

Modern accounting requires that corporations, state governments and local governments count expenses immediately when a transaction occurs, even if the payment will be made later.

The federal government does not follow the rule, so promises for Social Security and Medicare don't show up when the government reports its financial condition.
Bottom line: Taxpayers are now on the hook for a record $59.1 trillion in liabilities, a 2.3% increase from 2006. That amount is equal to $516,348 for every U.S. household. By comparison, U.S. households owe an average of $112,043 for mortgages, car loans, credit cards and all other debt combined.

Unfunded promises made for Medicare, Social Security and federal retirement programs account for 85% of taxpayer liabilities. State and local government retirement plans account for much of the rest.

This hidden debt is the amount taxpayers would have to pay immediately to cover government's financial obligations. Like a mortgage, it will cost more to repay the debt over time. Every U.S. household would have to pay about $31,000 a year to do so in 75 years.

The Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Board, which sets federal accounting standards, is considering requiring the government to adopt accounting rules similar to those for corporations. The change would move Social Security and Medicare onto the government's income statement and balance sheet, instead of keeping them separate.

The White House and the Congressional Budget Office oppose the change, arguing that the programs are not true liabilities because government can cancel or cut them.
Chad Stone, chief economist at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, says it can be misleading to focus on the government's unfunded liabilities because Medicare's financial problems overwhelm the analysis.

"There is a shortfall in Medicare and Medicaid that is potentially explosive, but that is related to overall trends in health care spending," he says.

[Crushaholic]

Hopefully, the next president will be more fiscally conservative and Congress will do the same. However, I have serious doubts...

[Hotrod]

Well if we want to do our part we have 2 options

1. One payment in full for $516,348

or

2. 75 easy yearly installments of $31,000

[yavoon]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

Well if we want to do our part we have 2 options

1. One payment in full for $516,348

or

2. 75 easy yearly installments of $31,000

cancel the programs that promise the unpromisable. unfortunately they wont be cut in a timely and economically prudent manner. we'll first tax every person we can find w/ a dime of extra money using every communist reasoning in the book, then when EVEN THAT fails we'll cut it after we've hobbled ourselves.

[Crushaholic]

...or $51 for the next 600 years. That might work....

NAH That's STILL too much...$1 for the next 30,000 years? I can do that

[BroncoBuff]

I guess it's a bad time to start the OM pledge drive after all ...

[W*GS]

Expect to see the pro-entitlement folks spin this one silly...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Originally Posted by W*GS

Expect to see the pro-entitlement folks spin this one silly...

Expect to see Republicans reign in the biggest spender in the history of the country like they have the past 6 years .......................... or not.

[W*GS]

Obviously, BB, you didn't read the article. It's entitlements (Social Security and the various forms of socialized medicine) that are driving this fiscal insanity. Seeing as how no politician will even touch those, and how they're considered "mandatory", Bush hasn't done a damned thing about them - just like every President before him...

[bendog]

Bushii has succeeded in defunding social security and medicare. What a guy.

[Hotrod]

Originally Posted by bendog

Bushii has succeeded in defunding social security and medicare. What a guy.

They were both in deep **** before he took over.

Maybe we should start giving SSI to illegals, and medical benifits........err wait.

[alkemical]

Yes it's always the proels fault.

[Hotrod]

Anyone want to take a guess at whats gonna happen whent he war is over? Thats usually not good for the economy.

[Hotrod]

Originally Posted by claviculasolomonis

Yes it's always the proels fault.

Im a redneck but........."proels"

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by bendog

Bushii has succeeded in defunding social security and medicare. What a guy.

How?

[alkemical]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

Im a redneck but........."proels"

I spelled it wrong:

Proles

[TailgateNut]

Originally Posted by yavoon

cancel the programs that promise the unpromisable. .

About time you realize the war should end. That'll save a bundle.

[bendog]

Originally Posted by W*GS

How?

well, I know communication is futile on this subject, because you prefer them to be defunded and will not objectively look to solutions. But, bushii's aim was to defund medicare via the pharmacy benefit. He suceeded. Social security is unsustainable, even though benefits have been cut, and the program is "funded" on paper.

The two workable solutions are: raising taxes for social security, prolly via the cap on the fica taxes; and going to nationalized healthcare in which a % of gnp is just budgeted for healthcare in a manner similar to all other post-industrialized first world economies. But, bushii refuses to even discuss either.

[W*GS]

Originally Posted by bendog

well, I know communication is futile on this subject, because you prefer them to be defunded and will not objectively look to solutions.

It's precisely because entitlement programs are unfunded to the tune of ~$60 trillion that they ought to be defunded, in any objective sense. One need not even get into the moral argument against them.

Originally Posted by bendog

But, bushii's aim was to defund medicare via the pharmacy benefit. He suceeded.

How does Bush's prescription drug program "defund" Medicare? It makes it an even greater behemoth than it already is.

Originally Posted by bendog

Social security is unsustainable, even though benefits have been cut, and the program is "funded" on paper.

Bush's attempts to reform SS were DOA. Why?

Originally Posted by bendog

The two workable solutions are: raising taxes for social security, prolly via the cap on the fica taxes;

Why? Why won't you even consider elimination (gradual, of course) of SS? What good, practical reasons are there for keeping it, and, making it consume even more of workers' income? Do you really want to penalize future generations that badly?

Originally Posted by bendog

and going to nationalized healthcare in which a % of gnp is just budgeted for healthcare in a manner similar to all other post-industrialized first world economies.

Note that medical costs in other nations are putting them at even greater risk of financial insolvency than even the US.

Granted, that we already pay far more than other nations (as %GDP) for our health care, but socializing it will not make the problem go away. There are many reasons why health care costs are what they are, and at the base of that is the belief of some that health care is a "right", to be provided "free" of charge, to anyone who wants however much of it.

Let's be blunt - does it make sense to expend finite health care resources on the terminally ill? Does it make sense to keep a 90+ year-old alive for a few more months, at the cost of thousands of dollars per day? Does it make sense to give a lifetime drinker a liver transplant?

It's fine and dandy to want "free" health care for all, but there's a lot of reality you're ignoring when you do.

[Crushaholic]

Originally Posted by bendog

well, I know communication is futile on this subject, because you prefer them to be defunded and will not objectively look to solutions. But, bushii's aim was to defund medicare via the pharmacy benefit. He suceeded. Social security is unsustainable, even though benefits have been cut, and the program is "funded" on paper.

The two workable solutions are: raising taxes for social security, prolly via the cap on the fica taxes; and going to nationalized healthcare in which a % of gnp is just budgeted for healthcare in a manner similar to all other post-industrialized first world economies. But, bushii refuses to even discuss either.

...or privatizing Social Security, which isn't a real great idea, either. Younger people just better get it through their head that Social Security won't be around when we retire (I'm 36). We're merely paying for the older generation (which isn't a bad thing).

[dark_hawk]

Originally Posted by Crushaholic

...or privatizing Social Security, which isn't a real great idea, either. Younger people just better get it through their head that Social Security won't be around when we retire (I'm 36). We're merely paying for the older generation (which isn't a bad thing).

still think that sucks like none other though. having to save for your own retirement while paying for someone elses

[yavoon]

Originally Posted by TailgateNut

About time you realize the war should end. That'll save a bundle.

seek professional help. I hope u don't wakeup and eat ur cheerios and think about how bush's war is hurting ur enjoyment of ur slightly honied grain cereal.

[yavoon]

Originally Posted by dark_hawk

still think that sucks like none other though. having to save for your own retirement while paying for someone elses

most ppl w/ skill overpay massively into social security anyway. and social security benefits huge amts of things that have nothing to do w/ retirement. its just a giant pork project the gov't has been sucking at the teat of for half a century.

my guess is the democrats will get a communist bug up their ass and remove the cap on social security and just do away w/ all this pretense of "saving for retirment" and just turn it into a tax.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Hotrod

http://usatoday.printthis.clickabili...partnerID=1660
The federal government recorded a $1.3 trillion loss last year — far more than the official $248 billion deficit — when corporate-style accounting standards are used, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

Hey - that's exactly the same kind of accounting fraud that happened with the Treasury on Red Ink Ron and Poppy's watch.

The Enroning of America: Brought to you by God's Own Party.

[gunns]

Although SSI is it's own separate fund, stop giving it to legal immigrants. One thing I will hand to the SSA, they make sure they are legal. It's the AFDC/Med/FS we are giving to the illegals. Stop giving SSI to drug addicts/alcoholics that have corresponding conditions, such as depression. If politicians can illegally dip into our social security then we can dip into SSI to make up some of the difference. Stop giving financial aid to those that haven't worked at all in the past 1 year. If they couldn't work for 1 year they'd be eligible for SSI or SSDI. And for God's sake quit accepting the excuses these people come up with to overcome the time limits for the programs. Depression Please, we are all depressed.

START making those that earn over 90,000 a year pay medicare and social security taxes. And make it a crime to touch social security money's that have been paid by us with a mandatory jail sentence. Guess that would kind of hard though as those voting to do it would be voting to do that to themselves.