Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
Rob Long ·
Dec 28, 2010 at 8:57am
Every American does. That's what the miserable, indefensible 111th Congress spent, per capita, on its nonsense bailouts, greasy pork spending, handouts of all kinds, and general crapulence.
So, thanks to the magic of the Google Machine, I've started to wonder what, exactly, I could have bought with that $10,429. I mean, you can do some cool stuff with that money. Like invest it. Or save it. Or....well, or any of the things listed here. (Please note: I've topped off the $10,429 to $10,500, on the theory that if the government is in for a nickel of your money, it's in for a dime.)
My favorite is this $10,500 bottle of Macallan. Though the truth is, it almost doesn't matter what you spend it on. You'll spend it better.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
Rob, the $10,429 reflects only the "new debt" charged by this congress, right? That is to say it's over and above the operating costs we would have incurred had the federal budget remained on auto-pilot with no new and nifty ideas like Obamacare, ad nausem, correct? The 111th gets my vote for worst congress ever.
May '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
I think it is the total new debt taken on since the 111th Congress started in 2009. The debt at the end of 2008 was near $10T, and at the end of 2010 is nearly $14T. Over $3T was added to the debt during these two years. See http://www.federalbudget.com/ for figures.
It's worse than it sounds on the surface, too; if you consider a family of four, it's over $40K in new debt. That's just staggering.
Of course, the added future cost of new programs (such as Obamacare which you mentioned) will dwarf this.
Sep '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started .. And an enourmous debt to boot!"
Henry Morgenthau - Secretary of the Treasury to FDR
May '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
The argument that would be made by the Keynesians is that you wouldn't have had that money to spend during this time period, because it's not like Congress took it away from you and spent it. So, it's supposedly a net benefit to the economy; it's spending that occurred that would not have otherwise occurred.
The only problem is they're going to have to take it from you later in taxes, or from your children or grandchildren. A transfer of wealth from the future to today. Immoral in the extreme.
Congress critters should be thrown in the slammer for this. I am almost literally serious about this.
Jul '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
"You'll spend it better"
Therein lies the crux of modern economic debate. If you are able to accept as a matter of principle that me using $10,500 to buy a bottle of rare scotch is by definition a smarter use of money than the government spending it on my behalf, then you are a free market conservative.
Unfortunately, I am guessing that no more than 25% - 30% of Americans would agree with that proposition. Especially when the propagandists of the left tell them that it is really just a bunch of rich folks money on the table, and they don't really need it anyway.
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
Chris Deleon
Congress critters should be thrown in the slammer for this. I am almost literally serious about this. · Dec 28 at 10:00am
Agree totally.
Patrick Shanahan: "You'll spend it better"
If you are able to accept as a matter of principle that me using $10,500 to buy a bottle of rare scotch is by definition a smarter use of money than the government spending it on my behalf, then you are a free market conservative.
Unfortunately, I am guessing that no more than 25% - 30% of Americans would agree with that proposition. Especially when the propagandists of the left tell them that it is really just a bunch of rich folks money on the table, and they don't really need it anyway. · Dec 28 at 11:12am
Boy, do I hope you're wrong! But I fear you're right.
Jul '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
It didn't matter if the government spent it or if I spent it.... I was going to use it to pay taxes anyway.
Edited on Dec 28, 2010 at 12:27pmOct '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
I'm going to engage in something that seems like sophistry to me, but what the heck.
So long as 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax, the debt is literally other people's money for half of America. Take an average family size of 3 (rounded down) and the average household owes $30,000. But since only half of the households pay federal income tax, the average household that pays taxes would need to be responsible for $60,000 in order to cover this year's debt.
Of course we could grow our way out of the mess by adding more households ... but surely they will be incurring more debt as well.
This is sophistry right? The average taxpaying household doesn't really owe $60,000 for this year's spending binge?
Feb '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
J. D. Fitzpatrick: I'm going to engage in something that seems like sophistry to me, but what the heck.
So long as 50% of Americans pay no federal income tax, the debt is literally other people's money for half of America. Take an average family size of 3 (rounded down) and the average household owes $30,000. But since only half of the households pay federal income tax, the average household that pays taxes would need to be responsible for $60,000 in order to cover this year's debt.
Of course we could grow our way out of the mess by adding more households ... but surely they will be incurring more debt as well.
This is sophistry right? The average taxpaying household doesn't really owe $60,000 for this year's spending binge? · Dec 28 at 12:19pm
Remember the budget also includes Social Security taxes, corporate taxes, and other forms of taxes, not just income taxes.
Also, it's referring to 2009 and 2010 put together, not just this year's spending.
May '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
Rob - The Macallan matches well with the bespoke shoes made from Russian leather recovered recently from a 1786 shipwreck cargo.
See http://www.gjcleverley.co.uk/index.htm
The shoes will last longer than the Democrats in the Whitehouse; and you get bragging right with shoes older than the US Constitution. By the way the cost is around GBP 2,000 with multiple fittings and your own personal last.
See - you really can do better than both Houses of Congress, and the Public Service with your own money.
May '10
Re: Happy New Year! You Owe $10,429.
Yes, it is sophistry. Here's why:
You're succumbing to the fallacy of mistaking statistical categories for actual flesh-and-blood human beings (Sowell). At a given moment in time, yes, half of America may be living off the other half; however, over the course of his working life, a typical American achieves net-contributor status as he rises in rank in both income and wealth. In other words, one's age and one's wealth (and therefore one's tax burden) are highly correlated. There remains a permanent net-taker underclass, of course, but it's not half the population.
Still, your general point is well-taken: The burden is not equally distributed by any means.