Unfunded Liabilities, The Fed, Globalization and Syria

National-Debt-GDP

National-Debt-GDP (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

U.S. National Debt Additions

U.S. National Debt Additions (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Graph of U.S. gross federal governmen...

English: Graph of U.S. gross federal government debt from 1940 to 2010, as a percentage of GDP, broken down by presidential terms. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

U.S. Total Deficits vs. National Debt Increase...

U.S. Total Deficits vs. National Debt Increases 2001-2010 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

RedState:

While $16.5 trillion of debt is clearly unsustainable, what is even more alarming is what we are not talking about:The fact that, in addition to the $16.5 trillion of debt we currently have, every man, woman, and child in America also is on the hook for nearly $400,000 in unfunded liabilities–or, over $1 million for every household.”

Wall Street Journal:

“As a result, fiscal policy discussions generally focus on current-year budget deficits, the accumulated national debt, and the relationships between these two items and gross domestic product. We most often hear about the alarming $15.96 trillion national debt (more than 100% of GDP), and the 2012 budget deficit of $1.1 trillion (6.97% of GDP). As dangerous as those numbers are, they do not begin to tell the story of the federal government’s true liabilities.”

The Atlantic:

“The U.S. national debt comes out to about $16 trillion today. That’s something. But it’s nothing compared to the extra $87 trillion in unfunded liabilities to Social Security, Medicare, and federal pensions. Here’s how that works. If you add up all of the U.S. government’s promises to pay retirement and health care benefits for the next 75 years and subtract the projected tax revenue dedicated to those programs over the next 75 years, there is a gap. A $87 trillion gap — in addition to a $16 trillion hole.”

US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_Color_Coded_Congress_Control_and_Presidents_Highlightedus-federal-debt-percentage-gdp-by-president-political-partyholders-of-u-squantitative_easing_final

Tyler Durden on 08/31/2013 15:58 -0400; Zero Hedge:

“The goal, I believe, is to utterly transform the world’s political, economic, and social systems.  The goal is to generate intense fear; fear that can be used as capital to buy, as the globalists call it, a “new world order”.  Syria is the first domino in a long chain of calamities; what the Rand Corporation sometimes refers to as a “linchpin”.  As I write this, the Obama Administration is moving naval and ground forces into position and clamoring in a painfully pathetic fashion to convince the American public that 90% of us are “wrong” and that a strike on Syria is, in fact, necessary.  It appears that the establishment is dead set on starting this chain reaction and accelerating the global collapse.  So, if a strike does occur, what can we expect to happen over the next few years?  Here is a rundown…”

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-09-02/surreal-sadistic-syrian-subterfuge

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Unfunded Liabilities, The Fed, Globalization and Syria

    • Here’s a chunk of the Bloomberg piece that covers the “blot:”

      Powell’s UN speech, part of the Bush administration’s public case for the U.S. invasion of Iraq, with its unsupported assertions of mobile Iraqi biological-warfare labs and a “sinister nexus” between Iraq and al-Qaeda terrorists, was based on “deeply flawed” evidence, Powell writes.

      “So why did no one stand up and speak out during the intense hours we worked on the speech?” Powell writes. “‘Some of these same analysts later wrote books claiming they were shocked that I have relied on such deeply flawed evidence.”

      Powell, who has quarreled over policy for years with former Vice President Dick Cheney, writes that Cheney had his chief of staff, Lewis “Scooter” Libby, make the case for Iraq having weapons of mass destruction “as a lawyer’s brief and not as an intelligence estimate.”

      Because Libby’s material was “unusable,” Powell writes, he enlisted the help of the Central Intelligence Agency to prepare for his UN speech. Powell didn’t know that “much of the evidence was wrong,” he says.

      • So you’re saying, what? Powell was a nice innocent guy? I think his previous episode with fame, during Iran Contra undermines that argument, but I want to take the argument down another line.

        Suppose that Powell was in fact totally honest. Suppose Powell was a nice innocent man who just wanted to do right. And he was fooled by Cheney + CIA staff, which wasn’t his fault.

        From this, would you conclude that we SHOULD or SHOULD NOT believe what Kerry is saying?

      • “Powell was a nice innocent guy?”

        No

        “From this, would you conclude that we SHOULD or SHOULD NOT believe what Kerry is saying?”

        I feel we should not get involved in Syria, independent of any “evidence.”

      • Ah, great. That’s what I was getting at. Also that this whole situation illustrates the sameness between the current government and the one from 10 years ago.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s