With the President being utterly clueless about the implications of the current welfare state--more or less that even if you taxed "the rich" (really, again, the currently prosperous) at 100%, there still wouldn't be enough to cover even our current deficit, let alone the tens of trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities of Medicare and Social Security--we are left with what ought to be a terrifying question to anyone who reads and comprehends the actuarial reports of any welfare state:
What will happen when the welfare state is dismantled--either when it collapses of its own weight (my guess about the more likely scenario), or when politicians actually heed the warnings of the actuaries and scale it back?
Samuel Gregg gives a stab at it, and by and large, I think he gets it right, and we'd better take it seriously. More or less, at least half the nation has not figured out that there is no tax that can rescue programs whose unfunded liabilities exceed the entire wealth of the nation. Barring mass repentance on their part leading to huge reforms in Medicare, Medicaid, welfare programs, and Social Security, the nation is headed for a financial collapse in the next few decades. Actuarially, the question is when, not if.
Congratulations to Senator Franken. . . - for being the likely beneficiary of illegal voting: How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2...
16 minutes ago