Can you manage your own finances successfully? Guess who can't.

Every person who has ever been able to build a stable home, to be able to support themselves and family, to prepare for retirement- has had to come to terms with the fact that managing your finances is a critical and fundamental necessity. You simply must be able to live within your means, and have an effective plan for the future- which you adhere to.

While many do that well on the personal level, we fail miserably as a society, with far too many people believing in the illusion of free money; that somebody else will pay. This is a brief view of why the current political promotion of free things can have no possible end result other than to bankrupt- Everybody.

We will use just one issue to demonstrate how far our of balance we already are- and that is called “Unfunded Liabilities”. Simply stated, that is having incurred a debt that you have made no provision to pay back when it comes due- and is not included on the financial balance sheet of today. These debts exist on the federal state, county and city levels. And- they are growing every day, because people are working now that will be entitled to future payments- and they are depending on them. It's a problem that is growing rapidly, like an aggressive cancer of the finances.

Largest such items on the list, for both federal government and states, are pension plans. Because the eventual payments do not show on current financial statement, it's been common to make very liberal arrangements to attract people to certain jobs- it allows offering ludicrous benefits when the current officials will be long gone when the bills come due. Of course, they will fall on the taxpayers when they do, and that will be? Your grandchildren and great-grandchildren. That is a major part of the legacy we give to the future.

I think all that is needed here are the numbers. Once you realize how massive these unfunded debts are, you will understand the financial disaster they represent for the children that you love today.


UNFUNDED LIABILITIES (ESTIMATED DUE TO VARIABLES)

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: $200 Trillion Dollars. That's $200,000,000,000.000.00.
That is 10 TIMES what the national debt is.

CALIFORNIA:
Reports $242 billion on the state level, but independent research show it is $769 billion.

California's and other cities debts are not part of state numbers, here are a few city numbers:
Los Angeles: They estimate $8.2, but research shows it to be $35.7 billion.
San Francisco: They estimate $2.3, but research puts it at $14.1 billion.
New York City: They estimate $61.6, but research puts it at $145 billion.

Remember- these numbers are growing everyday. Research shows that the most liberal locations have been the most irresponsible, they have the larger levels of unfunded debt.
Given this looming fiscal disaster- consider the wisdom of the benefits that the democrats and left now want to burden us with-

• Forgive $640 billion in student loans.
• Free medicare for all.
• Rebuild every building in America, eliminate airplanes and the incredible list of things on AOC's “Green New Deal”
• Guaranteed basic income for all- including those who choose not to work.
• Bring in unlimited illegal immigrants with access to all our social services.

The list of such irresponsible proposals is of course much longer, and each of them add hugely to the fiscal imbalance we are already facing. The bottom line is that nothing is really free, and if we fail to act responsibly in managing our finances- IF we actually buy into the "free" scams- nothing can save us. These promises are somewhat like fish-bait, they look like a free meal, and appeal to those who don't understand they are putting themselves on the hook to be the meal that gets consumed. We simply have to be wise enough to say NO.

Each time we hear these proposals, we should realize that the people behind them are fishing- fishing for your vote and support, but as sure as the sun will rise... fishing for control of your soul and freedom as well. Worse.... they are selling out your children and grandchildren; and you are the only person who can stop that.

We can't be responsible later- that will be to late. It must be now, before you find yourself hooked.


Ref:
https://www.policyed.org/pension-pursuit/pension-liability-state/map

 

Your MEANS, can be eliminated in a very short time, with medical eventualities. You are LIKELY to be hit with SOME kind of medical episode during your productive years, that is likely to impoverish you, and likely several others, in that process.

Saving for retirement, and even the sane idea of that, is dependent on a whole culture that lives up to its bargains. And many don't. And we are going in a third worlds direction, as far as that whole culture of stability.

 

I am for forgiving student loans.

There's no way I could ever pay that stuff back.

It's not fair that they way overcharge us simply because they know it's guaranteed money.

It's the biggest racket on the planet.

If they had kept the prices sane it wouldn't be an issue.

Charging me 300 bucks for a textbook......seriously?

 

Trump, has worked FURIOUSLY, as he does, in all areas of CONSUMER protection, to MAKE you prey to corps that will use your life force, to enrich themselves. Call it RENTSEEKING. Trump is a flim flam man, and takes folks. As he says, he ALWAYS gets the good end of the DEAL. That leaves EVERYONE ELSE holding the bag. This is who you support. He thinks folks SHOULD get rich off the sucker born every minute.

Payday loans, reverse mortgages, student loans, Trump wants to END, any sense of obligation to work in the interest of your client. Fiduciary responsibility is one of his pet peaves.

 

Well this student loan thing was way before him or even Obama.

Obama at least gave us some protection with the IBR program, which he did against republican opposition and to Trumps credit he hasn't tried to change that yet.

That was like the one good thing Obama did during his presidency.

I'm not sure who is actually responsible for this student loan crisis....Bush or Clinton or both of them....maybe Reagan....not sure.

I know it wasn't Obama or Trump though.

 

Almost all 'unfunded liabilities' are current government employee's future pensions.

All pensions are paid for by non-government employees/citizens through various taxes.

They may as well forget it, as they will never get their full pensions, and I have little sympathy for government employees who game the system for inflated pensions in their last years of employment.

 

Yes you could.

What kind of car do you have? What kind of housing do you have; rent? What kind of phone do you have? How much money do you spend on entertainment? Eating out? Vacations?

"Oh, I can't pay back my loan but I have a brand new friggin car" That's millennial speak.

 

While a legitimate concern, most of the unfunded liabilities are promised future pension benefits for government workers. Calculating the "unfunded" amount is more art than science. And in the end the unfunded portion will either be made up with future taxes, or not paid.

Let's also not forget that the reason we have such large pension liabilities is because government for decades kept your taxes low by boosting future pension payouts rather than increasing current wages. You seem okay with taking that current benefit while complaining about the long-term cost.

You seem to be mistaking "costs money" with "irresponsible." Irresponsible is taking $100 billion and setting it on fire. Whether a given *investment* is "irresponsible" depends on the cost-benefit analysis.

Let's take it one by one:

Forgiving current student loans doesn't actually cost the government anything, since the loans have already been made. It cancels an income stream (the future value of those loans being repaid), but it doesn't involve paying out any additional funds.

Further, staggering levels of student debt are a real issue, thanks largely to the cost of college rising far faster than wages, partly due to a massive drop in state support for public colleges. Trying to address that is not "irresponsible". You can argue whether this approach is the best one, but you can't just dismiss it out of hand.

For instance, you have to take that $640 billion write-off and factor in things like:

-- The government's interest in having a well-educated work force in today's global knowledge economy;
-- The economic boost from graduates suddenly having a lot more disposable income and a lot more economic options -- such as the ability to start a new company, rather than take some wage-slave job in order to pay off their debt.

Not sure how you consider this "irresponsible." Economically speaking, it's a bit of a wash: we're not talking about $1 trillion in new spending as a country; we're talking about taking money we now pay out in the form of health insurance and co-pays and paying it in taxes instead. The idea is it would provide the following benefits:

-- Remove costs from the system by removing profit motive;
-- Make access to health care unrelated to your employment status, allowing people a lot more economic freedom (no more working a job you hate simply because you need the health insurance). This would encourage people to be more entrepreneurial, more likely to work for small companies and start-ups, etc.
-- Promote a healthy populace, by no longer making poor people choose between groceries/rent and seeing a doctor.
-- Keep medical inflation down thanks to the negotiating power of a single payer.

And here you're taking an aspirational proposal and treating it as if everything in it would be done and paid for tomorrow.

There is broad agreement that we need to invest a huge amount in rebuilding/repairing our infrastructure. As far as "every building in America", that's the sort of thing we do all the time: set a requirement for new construction, and gradually improve the existing stock as it is remodeled/replaced. If we want to make it happen even faster, we provide tax credits/deductions for such things, incentivizing building owners to do the work. This is neither radical nor complicated.

This one I have a lot of questions about, in large part because it *would* be a very large new cost, and if implemented poorly could create some perverse incentives.

That said, we *already* have a basic guaranteed income -- that's what cash welfare is. Many other countries have the same thing. Most European countries have welfare benefits that are far more generous than ours. This isn't really a radical idea, either. It's just a question of cost and effects

And this is complete bullshit.

 

The GOP certainly can't manage the nation's finances.

 

IF you could compare government finances to household finances (you can't), then I guess it would make sense to reduce income when you already run a deficit? Yes or no?

This is why Trump voters lecturing others about finances is ridiculous, when they jumped on the "tax cuts pay for themselves" propaganda bandwagon.

In any case, looking at the picture of total debt in the US, private and public combined, the government doesn't seem to be the worst offender:



Now, where does that leave companies and households? Are most of them financially irresponsible?

 

BTW: Is it irresponsible for households to get a mortgage? Or invest into the future through student loans for the kids?

 

As your own personal finances must be if you believe that. You seem to not understand fiscal realities at all- except that there will always be someone, someway, that will pay the bills.
God will help those who won't help themselves???

 

https://www.biblegateway.com/blog/2...-those-who-help-themselves-isnt-in-the-bible/

 

I am for forgiving student loans also BUT only for certain majors

Medical, Hard Sciences, Teaching and that's about it.

Rack up a boatload of debt to major in Gender Studies, French, etc. and suck it up buttercup...

 

The entire point is fiscal responsibility- money management. Debt can be useful- or deadly. The mortgage crisis came about because loans were made in situations where they could not be repaid- so the question is simply one of being financially prudent. But you know that, but decided to rag on it anyway.

 

Didn't say it was, did I??

It's apparently what the left believes. Just don't worry about the bills you create, somebody else will pay them. You know that too, don't you??
Of course you do. After all, it's Trumps fault you spent money you didn't have.

 

Way to completely not address any points I raised. Concession accepted.

 

Heck no! That doesn't teach accountability. In the real world, no one is going to pay off your car, house or any other loan.

If you can't afford to go to college, then don't go.

Not everyone has to go to college to be successful.

If less people went to college, then the colleges would be begging people to enroll by dropping their cost. Supply and demand.

 

Is Trump fiscally responsible? Yes or no?

Does the federal government finances operate like household finances? Yes or no?

Can households print money? Yes or no?

Is public investment into education good or bad?

Is public investment into public health good or bad?

Me thinks your opening post is just another version of the "I hate paying taxes" posts that are a dime a dozen on here.

 

Concession?

I only put this post up to see how many ass-hats would jump up to defend a blatantly obvious truth; prove themselves incapable of understanding basic economics.

Your points are a lot like flyspecks on the wall. Not really relevant, general BS, ignoring the original points all together to make trash argument.

Typical- TYPICAL- leftist BS. Never face the reality of anything.

 

MEDICARE is not now nor has it EVER BEEN FREE.I know because I have paid into it every day since it began in the 1960's!!!

 

Tell that to the clown car of 20 Democratic Presidential candidates.

Government programs cost money. A lot of money.

 

Thats true now, of course- but one of the new demands is "Free medicare for all".

 

Continued failure to actually address any points I raised noted, and concession again accepted.

 

People pay $300 for a textbook? Seriously? Small wonder they are so uneducated and enslaved to debt.

Not you, though.