International News
See other International News Articles
Title: We're All Greeks Now
Source:
Pat Buchanan
URL Source: http://buchanan.org/blog/were-all-greeks-now-4802
Published: Jul 18, 2011
Author: Pat Buchanan
Post Date: 2011-07-18 15:47:55 by jwpegler
Keywords: None
Views: 33914
Comments: 63
Departing for New Hampshire in November 2010, Sen. Judd Gregg, the fiscal conservative President Obama wanted in his Cabinet, blurted an inconvenient truth: “This nation is on a course where if we don’t do something about it, get … fiscal policy (under control), we’re Greece.” The remark was regarded as hyperbole. But Gregg had a point. For though Greece, measured by the size of her economy, is only 2 to 3 percent of the EU or the U.S. economy, she is a microcosm of the West. Consider the demography. According to the most recent revision of the U.N.’s “World Population Prospects,” Greece in 2010 had 11.2 million people. More than 24 percent were 60 or above, more than 18 percent 65 or older. Three percent were 80 or above. And, every year, for every nine Greeks who are born, 10 Greeks die. Greece is slowly passing away. Fast forward to 2050. Greece’s population will have fallen by 300,000 to 10.8 million. The median age will have risen by eight years to 49.5. Half the population will be 50 or older. More critically, the share of Greece’s population 60 or older will be 37.4 percent, with 31.3 percent over 65. One in nine Greeks will be over 80. If Athens is breaking under the weight of early retirement and pensions for seniors today, her situation will be horrendous by mid-century. Where, in 2010, there were four Greeks under 60 for every Greek over 60, by 2050, there will only be 1.7 Greeks under 60 for every Greek over 60. Conclusion: The retirement age must rise, and pension benefits fall, or Greece collapses. What of the possibility of a new baby boom? Not likely, given that the fertility rate in Greece has been below replacement levels for three decades and is today only two-thirds of that needed to replace the present population. Indeed, by 2050, the fertility rate of Greek women will have been below zero population growth for 80 years. One wonders: How can the U.N. estimate that Greece’s population will fall only 3 percent by then? Is the U.N. assuming mass immigration from the Muslim world? But what does Greece have to do with the rest of Europe, or with us? Only this. The median age of all of Europe is rising, and the demographic numbers for Greece look positively rosy alongside those of the east, where population declines in the tens of millions are projected for Russia and Ukraine. And outside Iceland and Albania, not one nation of Europe has a fertility rate sufficient to maintain its population. Those that are projected to grow, like Britain, have to be relying on Third World immigrants and their higher birth rate. But while this may maintain an existing population size, immigrants from the Maghreb, Middle East, Caribbean, Latin America and South Asia, on average, lack the language, technical skills and educational levels of native-born Europeans. The same is true in the U.S., where peoples of European descent are expected to drop to half the population by 2041. Hispanics will grow from 15 percent to near 30 percent of the U.S. population, and their absolute numbers from 50 million to 135 million by 2050. Yet, again, Hispanics and children of Hispanic immigrants have not, as of yet, reached close to parity in educational achievement with Americans of East Asian or European ancestry. People equate today’s immigration with the immigration of 1890-1920. But another major difference is this: We erected a Great Society over 50 years that did not exist in 1920. In Washington in the 1950s, a city of 800,000, half black and half white, food stamps had not been invented. Families fed themselves. Today, in a District of Columbia of 600,000, one in five are on food stamps. Nationally, a program that did not exist in 1964 feeds one in seven Americans, 44 million people, at a cost of $77 billion a year. And that is but a small fraction of our new Great Society. We are entering a new “age of austerity,” said British Prime Minister David Cameron in 2009. The halcyon days are over. Government payrolls, as is happening from California to New York to Washington, D.C., will have to be slashed. Pension and health care benefits, not only for seniors, will have to be reduced. Retirement ages will have to be raised. From food stamps to foreign aid, programs are going to be capped and cut. The left believes it can get the money from the wealthy. But the top 1 percent of Americans in income already carry 40 percent of the federal income tax load, while the bottom 50 percent of wage-earners ride free. This, too, will have to end. We are either going to man up and radically reduce government at all levels in the United States, or the bond markets are going to do it for us, as they are doing it today for Greece, Ireland and Portugal. We’re all Greeks now.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 60.
#1. To: jwpegler (#0)
That's one of the stupidest things i've ever read. Greece isn't selling its debt for next to nothing. Our debt/deficit to GDP ratios are nowhere near Greece's. Greece can't devalue its currency. Greece's economy isn't growing unlike ours. And we could balance the budget over the next ten years simply by having Congress do nothing, thus allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, and ending both the annual AMT and Medicare patches. Folks want to continue to manufacture a debt crisis in the U.S. when there is none, simply because they want to dismantle New Deal and Great Society programs that they've hated for years.
Of course it is. According to the IMF, total public debt: Greece -- 130% of GDP U.S. -- 93% of GDP (including both Federal and State levels) Greece is clamping down. The U.S. is still spending. The U.S. will surpass Greece's GDP to debt ratio in a few years if nothing isn't done.
Cutting spending in a recession further reduces revenues - see U.S. 1937, Ireland/UK, for examples. Heck, you can even look at the present-day U.S. where massive cuts in state/local government spending over the last year coupled with record low tax rates have resulted in a 9.2% unemployment rate and a slowing economy. And not only is our spending relative to GDP is falling, as is our deficit., but we have far more flexibility to deal with our debt/deficit issues than Greece - we could for example restore tax revenues to historical norms, or as I noted above, simply do nothing and watch our deficit go away in 10 years. These are all facts you wish to ignore.
Nope...
your chart ends in 2009. Remember just yesterday I showed you data showing that spending relative to GDP had fallen from 25% to 24.1% this year? Again - record low tax rates, massive cuts to state/local spending, and falling federal spending relative to GDP = 9.2% unemployment.
The year is not over. The only reason that it might be slightly less than 25% in 2011 is that the GOP Congress has put the breaks on Obama's big spending plans. Government spending as a percentage of GDP has escalated from 19% of GDP to 25% today. As the chart I posted demonstrates, the long-term trend has been for increased government spending, regardless of what happens in any given single year. That's what we have to stop, now.
actually the fall is mostly due to the end of the stimulus. Even with the end of it, Obama's "big spending plans" pail when compared to the big spending Republicans did from 2001-2007. Again, facts which you ignore. Thank your beloved Republicans, notice how your chart shot up "before" Obama became President?
Right. And if the GOP wasn't there the Democrats would be cranking up another do- nothing stimulus.
The stimulus created or saved 3 million jobs. Meanwhile, cap, cut and balance will eliminate 700k jobs this year alone. Why does the GOP hate jobs?
The stimulus may have temporarily saved the jobs of some state and local bureaucrats, but that's exactly the problem. It just postponed the inevitable and those people are getting laid off now. This is not how you grow an economy.
This is not how you grow an economy. if you don't grow the economy by cutting government spending, then why do you keep arguing for cutting government spending?
Read what I said again, when you are sober and able to comprehend it.
sorry, I'd have to be drunk to ignore as much economic reality as you do. Maybe one of these days you could explain why government cutbacks and layoffs across the country coupled with record low tax rates aren't leading to a booming economy.
I've already explained it, but you are not comprehending. So, I'll give you an analogy to help you understand. In the 1970s, the government came out with a food pyramid. It said: Fats are bad and carbohydrates are good. We now know that this is completely incorrect. There are fats that make you healthy (omega-3), fats that are a little unhealthy (saturated fats), and fats that will kill you (trans fats, like margarine that the government promoted as a healthier alternative to other fats). We now also know that some carbohydrates (complex carbohydrates) are healthy while others will make you fat. There are good and bad tax and spending policies as well. Larding up the 80,000 page tax code with more special interests deductions is unhealthy because it distorts economic activity. Simplifying the tax code, while lowering marginal tax rates is healthy. Spending money on transfer payments is unhealthy because is disincents people from making an effort. Spending money on new infrastructure is healthy because it supports economic activity. So, what has Obama done? Borrow money to spend on transfer payments. What does he want to do? Increase marginal tax rates and use the money on transfer payments. This is very unhealthy for the country. That's the problem.
Again, the facts don't support your claim. In addition for calling for $3 trillion in cuts in programs including SS and Medicare, Obama continues to push for more spending on infrastructure: And you still haven't addressed how government layoffs and cut-backs, coupled with record low tax rates, have gotten us to 9.2% unemployment.
He's done no such thing. Obama has refused to put one concrete spending cut on the table. Listen to his language. He wants to "cut spending in the tax code". That means he wants to eliminate deductions to raise more money. He doesn't want to cut spending at all. Not even on programs that study hookers in China or try to determine if the size of a gay man's penis predisposes him to be on the top or bottom. (These are both actual government programs that we've spent millions of dollars on.) Obama and the Democrats passed an $800 billion "stimulus" bill. Only $60 billion went to infrastructure. The other $740 bill went to transfer payments, including those that temporarily kept unneeded state and local bureaucrats in their jobs. It predictably failed. Those bureaucrats are getting laid off now that the "stimulus" money is gone. The government is out of control. It's time to reign it in.
Bull. He's proposed a plan that would cut $3 trillion and raise $1 trillion in new revenues over 12 years. The GOP flatly dismissed it. See: http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/2011/07/07/obamas-4-trillion-grand-bargain/ That's part of it - Tom Coburn proposed the same thing. Heck Reagan signed tax simplification into law in 1986 that raised revenues. Another false claim - 1/3rd of the stimulus went to tax cuts. You continue to make point after point - none of which have any factual basis. So why isn't the economy growing as a result of state / local government cuts coupled with record low tax rates?
#61. To: go65 (#60)
Tax RATES are NOT at record lows. I've tried to explain this to you over and over but you are too dense to get it. There is no point in talking to you any longer. You are now the third person on my content filter.
You F ing libTURDS are delusional kool-aide swilling FOOLS. Not a word you that have said here is true. It's ALL "spin"/LIES. YOUR messiah "king" obammy is destroying this nation's economy on purpose and you libTURD fools are all for it! You assholes are dangerous to us ALL, YOU ALL must be politically destroyed for the good of America's future, FOR OUR CHILDREN. FUCK YOU and the horse you rode in on.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest“This nation is on a course where if we don’t do something about it, get … fiscal policy (under control), we’re Greece.”
#3. To: go65 (#1)
(Edited)
Our debt/deficit to GDP ratios are nowhere near Greece's.
#4. To: jwpegler (#3)
(Edited)
Greece is clamping down. The U.S. is still spending.
#5. To: go65 (#4)
And not only is our spending relative to GDP is falling...
#6. To: jwpegler (#5)
#7. To: go65 (#6)
(Edited)
Remember just yesterday I showed you data showing that spending relative to GDP had fallen from 25% to 24.1% this year?
#9. To: jwpegler (#7)
The only reason that it might be slightly less than 25% in 2011 is that the GOP Congress has put the breaks on Obama's big spending plans.
Government spending as a percentage of GDP has escalated from 19% of GDP to 25% today.
#11. To: go65 (#9)
actually the fall is mostly due to the end of the stimulus
#15. To: jwpegler (#11)
And if the GOP wasn't there the Democrats would be cranking up another do- nothing stimulus.
#49. To: go65 (#15)
(Edited)
The stimulus created or saved 3 million jobs
#50. To: jwpegler (#49)
It just postponed the inevitable and those people are getting laid off now.
#52. To: go65 (#50)
#54. To: jwpegler (#52)
Read what I said again, when you are sober and able to comprehend it.
#56. To: go65, capitalist eric (#54)
(Edited)
Maybe one of these days you could explain why government cutbacks and layoffs across the country coupled with record low tax rates aren't leading to a booming economy.
#57. To: jwpegler (#56)
(Edited)
So, what does Obama want to do? He wants to increase marginal tax rates and use the money on transfer payments. This is very unhealthy. That's the problem.
U.S. Chamber praises Obama's call for infrastructure spending
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum- line/2011/01/us_chamber_endorses_obamas_cal.html
#58. To: go65, capitalist eric (#57)
(Edited)
In addition for calling for $3 trillion in cuts...
#60. To: jwpegler (#58)
(Edited)
He's done no such thing.
Listen to his language. He wants to "cut spending in the tax code". That means he wants to eliminate deductions to raise more money.
Obama and the Democrats passed an $800 billion "stimulus" bill. Only $60 billion went to infrastructure. The other $740 bill went to transfer payments, including those that temporarily kept unneeded state and local bureaucrats in their jobs. It predictably failed. Those bureaucrats are getting laid off now that the "stimulus" money is gone.
Those bureaucrats are getting laid off now that the "stimulus" money is gone.
Replies to Comment # 60. record low tax rates
#62. To: go65 (#60)
So why isn't the economy growing as a result of state / local government cuts coupled with record low tax rates?
End Trace Mode for Comment # 60.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]